A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

BIBLIOTHECA PATRUM: OR, A NEW HISTORY OF Ecclesiastical Writers. TOME III. PART I.

CONTAINING An Account of the LIVES and WRITINGS of the Primitive FATHERS, that Flourished in the Be∣ginning of the Fifth Century of Christianity, with Censures upon all their BOOKS, determining which are Genuine, and which Spurious.

EVAGRIUS PONTICUS.

EVagrius Ponticus, a Disciple of the Macarii (not Evagrius of Antioch, mentioned in the Second Volume, nor Evagrius Scholasticus) was ordained Deacon of Constantinople by * 1.1 S. Gregory Nazianzen. He Sided with the Defenders of Origen, and left Constantino∣ple; but returned thither in the Year 379, to meet Melanius, and there took upon him the Habit of a Monk. From thence he retired into the Solitudes of Nitria, where he spent the rest of his Life untill about the Year 406. Socrates, affirms that he wrote very use∣full Books.

One, saith he, is intituled, The Monk, or, Of an Active Life; the Other, The Gno∣stick; i. e. Of a Contemplative Life, or for Enlightned Men. This Book is divided into Fifty Chapters. The Third is intituled Antirrheticus, which is a Collection of Passages out of Scrip∣ture against the Temptations of the Devil; divided into eight Parts, according to eight Sorts of Thoughts. He wrote, besides Six hundred Gnostick Problems, Two Books of Sentences: Whereof one is Addressed to the Coenobites, and the other to a Virgin.

Whosoever reads those Books, will easily see their Worth, and find them to be worthy of admiration. Palladius, Evagrius's Disciple, in the 86th. Chapter of his Monastick History, speaks much in his Commen∣dation, and observes that his Writings were either Books of Piety, or Monastical, or Polemical Books; and this agrees with what Socrates said before. S. Jerom in his Second Book against Pelagius, says, That he wrote to Virgins, to Monks, and to Melanius, and that he composed a Treatise of Apathy, i. e. Of freedom from Passion; and that the Books of this Author were known in the West as well as in the East, because some of them had been Translated by Ruffinus his Dis∣ciple. Gennadius mentions this Author in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers; and says, That he had Translated into Latin Evagrius's Treatise against the Eight principal Temptations, One hundred Sentences for the Anchorets, Fifty for learned Men, and some other Sentences that were something obscure: He speaks also of certain Rules dedicated to the Monks and Nuns. There is a Book commonly ascribed to this Author, entituled, The Lives of the Fathers; and some have be∣lieved that Gennadius said so: but they misunderstood him; for he doth not say that Evagrius was the Author of those Lives, but that the Book intituled, The Lives of the Fathers, did make men∣tion of Evagrius as a learned and pious Man: and accordingly we find in the 27th. Chapter of the Second Book of those Lives, that Evagrius is mentioned, and his Learning and Piety are com∣mended; whereas it is not likely that Evagrius would have commended himself.

We have some Fragments of this Author's Works, and several of his Sentences in the Code of the Mo••astic•• R•…•…s, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Liv•…•…and ••••oph••••••gms of the ••••t••••rs, in the Ascetick Treasure, pub∣lished by P•…•… ••nd particularly amo••••st th•• W••••ks of S. Nilus, where there are several of Evagrius's Writings; whether S. Nilus quoted them, or whether it happened by the Additions of Transcribers, is uncertain. Socrates, Chap. 7. of the Third Book of his History, cites a passage of Evagrius, taken out of his Gnostical Treatise, whe••e it is said, That it is impossible to define the Divinity, and to expound the Trinity. The same Author afterwards cites two passages of Evagrius in the 2••d▪ Chapter of the 4th. Book of his History; whereof one is taken out of the Gnostical Book, and th•• oth•••• out of the Practical Book. Maximus, S. John Damascene and An∣thony, quote many S••ntences of th•••• Author, which ••re found amongst the Works of S. Nilus.

Cotelierius in the Third Volume of his Monuments of the Greek Church, Page 68, &c. hath gi∣ven us part both of the Gnostical and of the Practical Books of Evagrius, which he took out of two Greek Manuscripts, and out of Authors who quoted those Discourses. They begin with a Letter to Anatolius, which is a•• a ••••eface ••o the whole Work of the two Books: This Preface is followed by 71 ••••a••t•••••• or S••••te••ces drawn from the G••ostical Book, which are written with∣out ••rd••••▪ and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 one with another: There is m••re Order in the 100 Chapters drawn from the Practical Book. The following Treatise contains eleven Instructions for the Monks. And this is what Cotelierius could find of the Works of Evagrius.

His Antirrhetical Treatise, or of the Eight Evil Thoughts, is equally imperfect, as we have it: For that which Bigotius hath given in Greek, the Translation whereof was found in S. John Da∣mascene, and in the Bibliotheca Patrum, before the Book of S. Nilus of the Eight Vices, is not the intire Treatise of Evagrius, but only an Epitome containing the Titles, and the Summ of those Eight Chapters, as Big••tius judiciously observes, and may be proved by the Testimony of Socrates; who assures us, That that Book of Evagrius contained several passages of Scripture, whereas there is not one in this.

Some also ascribe to Evagrius the History of an Hermite called Pac••n, related in Palladius, Chap. 29. and to be found amongst the Works of S. Nilus, published by Suarez at Rome, who observes that this Treatise was ascribed to Evagrius in his Manuscript, as well as the follow∣ing, which is a Dogmatical Letter concerning the Trinity; the Author whereof refutes the Errors both of the Arians and Macedonians. This Letter belongs to Evagrius, who writ it while he was at Constantinople with S. Gregory Nazianzen.

It is very probable also, that the Sentences or Maxims which are from Page 543, to 575, of the Writings attributed to S. Nilus, are written by Evagrius, as Holstenius confesses, upon the Au∣thority of Manuscripts. The Greek Manuscripts have quoted some of them under his Name, and they have great relation to those which Gennadius speaks of. To these must be added those which we find under the Name of Evagrius, at the latter end of the First Volume of the Bibliotheca Pa∣trum, in Greek and Latin, of the Year 1624; and a small Treatise of the Names of God, which is very obscure, published by Cotelierius in the Second Volume of his Monuments of the Greek Church, p. 116.

MARK.

MARK the Hermite, of whom we are to speak in this place, lived about the end of the Fourth Century; Palladius and Sozomen speak of him as of a very holy Man. He com∣posed * 1.2 some Ascetical Treatises, which have been attributed by Bellarmine and some others to one Mark, who lived under Leo the Emperour, in the Ninth Century: But Photius having made a very exact Extract of th••se Treatises, it is impossible they should be of a Man that lived since him; And therefore they must be ascribed to that Mark who lived about the latter end of the Fourth Century. This is what he saith of it in the Two hundredth Volume.

I have read Eight Books of Mark the Monk, whereof the First is intituled, Of the Spiritual Life; it may be profitable to those who have undertaken to lead a Religious life, i. e. to be Monks as well as the following; in which he shews, That they are deceived who think to be justified by their Works; shewing, that this is a very dangerous Opinion. He adds to this Instruction whol∣some Precepts, that lead to a Spiritual life. The Third Book is of Repentance; his design here is to shew, that this Vertue is of use at all times. This Book aims at the same end as the fore-going, and the same use may be made of it. His Style is clear enough, because he makes use of common terms, and speaks of things in general; but he wants the smoothness of Old A∣thens. If there be some darkness, it doth not proceed from the terms he useth, but from the things he treateth of; which are of such a nature, that it is easier to comprehend them by practice than by discoursing. Wherefore you shall find the same obscurity not only in the Books now mentioned, but also in those that follow, and in all the Books of those that have written of the Monastick life, and have discoursed of the Motions and Passions of the Soul, as well as of the Actions which they produce; it being impossible to teach with Words those things that depend upon practice. The Fourth Book, by way of Questions and Answers, shews, That by Baptism we have received not only the Pardon and Remission of our Sins, but also

the Grace of the Holy Spirit; and many other Spiritual gifts. The Fifth is a kind of Con∣ference of the Spirit with the Soul: whereby he proves, That we our selves are Authors of our Sins, and that we ought to accuse no body else upon that account. The Sixth is in the form of a Dialogue between Mark and an Advocate, who discourse of these following Subjects: That none is to seek revenge for an injury received, because the wrong we suffer is to be looked upon as a punishment for our Sins; he adds, that it is difficult to please Men, and that Prayer is to be preferred before any other labour. He concludes, by explaining wherein the Desires of the Flesh consist. He treats of Fasting in the Seventh Book, that is not written by way of Dialogue. The Eighth is directed to a Monk called Nicolas, treating of the ways of appea∣sing of Anger, and of quenching of Lust. There is also a Ninth Book against the Melchisede∣chians, wherein he spareth not his own Father who had been tainted with that Heresie.

Those that would read usefull Books, will not lose their time in reading of this. The Order of these Books is not the same in all Copies; In some those are found last which we have named first. This Observation of Photius is verified by the Latin Edition of these Eight Books, which were published by Johannes Picus, President of the Inquests in the Parliament of Paris, and inserted into the Bibliotheca Patrum. The Four first are there in Photius's order; but the Fifth in his or∣der is the last there; the Sixth is the last but one; and the Book concerning Fasting is immedi∣ately after that dedicated to Nicolas the Monk. That against the Melchisedechians is lost. This Author attributeth much to the Faith and Grace of Jesus Christ, and very little to the good Works and free Actions of Men, differing therein from most of the Ascetical Writers. He like∣wise ascribeth much to the vertue and efficacy of Baptism; and pretends, that it delivers us not only from Death, but also from Lust; and puts us in a condition of doing either good or evil: So that they who have received Baptism are as free either to good or evil as the first Man was. His Opinion is, That a perfect Christian is free from Temptations and from Passions; and maintains, that many of the Gospel-admonitions have the nature of Precepts; An ordinary excess of spiri∣tual Men. In short, it cannot be denied that among many true Maxims, there may be some stretched, and contrary to Truth and right Reason: which is but too common in the most part of Books of a Spiritual Life, both Ancient and Modern. The Original Greek of these Homilies is not only among the MSS. of the King's Library, and in some others, as Oudin hath observed; but also in the First Volume of the Greek and Latin Bibliotheca Patrum, Printed at Paris 1624.

I say nothing of another Mark, a Deacon of Gaza in Palaestine, who is reckoned to be the Au∣thor of the Acts of S. Porphyrius of Gaza, related by Metaphrastes and by Surius; because I re∣solved not to ingage in writing any Account of the Acts of the Martyrs, being unwilling to lanch into a Sea where it is difficult to avoid being often Shipwrackt.

SIMPLICIANUS, Bishop of Milan.

SIMPLICIANUS, Bishop of Milan, Successor to S. Ambrose, exhorted S. Austin by his Letters to exercise his Parts, and apply himself to expound the Holy Scripture: So that he may be said to * 1.3 have been to S. Austin, what Ambrose was to Origen. We have several Expositions of hard pla∣ces of Scripture which S. Austin dedicated to him. He also wrote a Letter, wherein he asked Questions, as if he had been to learn, and yet instructed by his questioning. This is what Gen∣nadius observes of this Author. S. Ambrose writ several Letters to him; and we have two Let∣ters of S. Austin, wherein he answered several Questions of Simplicianus, concerning some obscure Passages of the Holy Scripture. This Bishop held the See of Milan but a little while, for he died towards the latter end of the Year 400, or in the beginning of the Year 401.

VIGILIUS of Trent.

THere were several of this Name a 1.4. He that we speak of is the Bishop of Trent b 1.5, who suffered Martyrdom under the Consulship of Stilichon, in the Year 400 or 405 of Jesus * 1.6 Christ, to whom S. Ambrose wrote a Letter, which is the 24th amongst his Letters. Gennadius af∣firmeth,

that this Vigilius, Bishop of Trent, wrote a Letter or small Book in commendation of Martyrs, dedicated to Simplicianus; which contained the Acts of those who suffered Martyrdom in his time by the Cruelty of the Barbarians. Surius mentions this Letter, May 23. And it is be∣lieved that that Simplicianus, to whom it is dedicated, is the Successor of S. Ambrose in the Church of Milan c 1.7. There he gives an Account of the Martyrdom of Sisinnius and his Companions.

PRUDENTIUS.

QUintus Aurelius Prudentius Clemens was born in Saragossa, a City of Spain, in the Year 348 a 1.8; and being called to the Bar, was afterwards made a Judge in two considerable * 1.9 Towns, and then promoted by Honorius the Emperor to a very honourable Office. But at the Age of 57 Years, he resolved to mind the things of his Salvation, and to spend the rest of his life in composing of Hymns to the praise of God, and the honour of the Saints; with some Poems against the Pagan Religion, and touching the Duties of Christians. These particulars of his Life are set forth by himself in a Preface to one of his Poems. The Catalogue of his Poetical Works, to the most whereof he gave Greek Titles, is as follows:

Psychomachia, or The Combat of the Soul. There he describes in Hexameter Verse the Conflict of Vertue against Vice in the Soul of a Christian; and particularly of Faith against Idolatry, of Chastity against Uncleanness, of Patience against Anger, of Humility against Pride, of Sobriety against Excess, of Liberality against Covetousness, and of Concord against Dissention.

Cathemerinon, or Poems concerning each days Duty; they contain several Odes or Songs about the most ordinary Exercises of Christianity: As for example; Prayers and giving of Thanks at lying down and rising up, before and after Meals, about Fasting, upon the Death of Kindred or Friends, of the Nativity of Christ, and upon the Epiphany.

After these Hymns come several others, entituled 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or of Crowns, because made in Commendation of Martyrs.

The following Poems regard several Points of the Christian Religion, and are therefore entitu∣led Apotheosis, or Treatises upon the Divinity. In these he refuteth the Errors of the Heathens, of the Jews, Sabellians, Arians, and Apollinarians, and discourses of the Nature of the Soul, of Ori∣ginal Sin, and of the Resurrection.

Hamartigenia is a Treatise concerning the Original of Sin, against the Errors of Marcion.

The two Books against Symmachus oppose Idolatry. In the first is shewed the Original and Baseness of false Deities; and there is an Account of the Conversion of the City of Rome. In the second Petition which Symmachus presented to the Emperors, to obtain the Re-establishment of the Altar of Victory, and of the Service of the Gods, with the Ceremonies of the Pagan Religion, is answered.

The last of Prudentius his Works is an Abridgment of some Histories of the Old and New Testament in Distichs. Gennadius speaks of a Book written by Prudentius, called Dittochaeon, i. e. Double food, wherein he had comprised the Historical Part both of the Old and New Testa∣ment according to the Person's names. This Book is very like that we now speak of, but only written in a looser Style, and far from the beauty of his other Works. And whereas Prudentius calls the Dittochaeon a considerable Book upon the Old and New Testament, this is a small one

upon some places only; which makes me think that it is simply an Epitome of Prudentius's whole Work b 1.10.

However, Gennadius says, that Prudentius wrote a Commentary upon the Hexameron as far as to the Creation and Fall of the First Man: But that Book is lost.

Prudentius is no very good Poet, he often useth harsh Expressions not reconcilable to the Purity of Augustus's Age.

Prudentius's Works were printed and published at Rome, by Aldus Manutius, in the Year 1501, in Quarto. This Edition was followed by those of Germany, and others which are con∣formable to them; where are added Erasmus's Notes upon the Hymns upon Christmas, and the Epiphany, and those of Sichardus upon the Psychomachia. The Edition of Antwerp of 1540. in Octavo, contains the Annotations of Antonius Nebrissensis and Sichardus. That of 1564. was made after the Notes and Corrections of Putmannus, Graffemburgius and Victor Giselinus, who added his own Commentaries. Most of the late Editions, which are numerous, have been made after that. In 1613. Prudentius was printed at Hanover with Weitzius's Notes; and in 1614 the two Books against Symmachus were printed at Paris, with the Commentaries of Grangaeus: The last Edition of Prudentius was at Amsterdam, in 1667, in Twelves, with the Notes and Corrections of Nicolaus Heinsius.

DIADOCHUS.

IT is well known that Diadochus was Bishop of Photice, a City of Epirus, but the time wherein he lived is not known. Bellarmine and others that mention him, place him at the * 1.11 End of the Fourth Century, but without proof. However he is ancienter than Maximus, who quotes him in his Answers to Thalassius. Photius in the 201 Volume saith, That he had read a Book of that Bishop, which contained Ten Definitions and One Hundred Chapters, and observes that this Book is usefull for those who design to live a Spiritual Life. The Ten Defini∣tions prefixed before the Hundred Chapters are not extant: These (as we learn by the Titles which Photius hath preserved of them) were properly Reflections upon the principal Per∣fections of a Spiritual Life. The hundred Chapters of the Spiritual Life were published by Tur∣rianus; * 1.12 they contain several Maxims concerning a Religious and Spiritual Life; they are writ∣ten with a plain Stile, as most Ascetical Treatises are. There are several false Thoughts, and such spiritual Notions, as will not be rellished by every Body.

AUDENTIUS.

WHat Gennadius observeth of this Author, whom he mentions immediately after Pruden∣tius, is this:

Audentius a Spanish Bishop wrote a Book against the Manichees, Arians, * 1.13 and Sabellians, and chiefly against the Photinians, who are now called Bonosiacks; he intituled this Book, A Treatise of Faith against all Hereticks. He there shews, that the Son of God is co-eternal with the Father, and that he did not begin to be God when he made himself Man, and that he was born of the Virgin Mary.

SEVERUS ENDELECHIUS.

WE have a Bucolick, or Pastoral Poem, of one Severus Endelechius, about the End whereof there is a Discourse of the Efficacy of the Sign of the Cross, and of the Christian Religi∣on, * 1.14 to the embracing of which Tityrus exhorts his Companion. This Author lived since Con∣stantine, but the time is not known. His Poem is pretty well writ. It is likely he lived about the End of the Fourth, or the beginning of the Fifth Century.

FLAVIANUS.

FLAVIANUS Presbyter of Antioch, having governed that Church during the Arian Persecutions, in the Absence of Meletius his Bishop, was after his Death, in the Year 380, * 1.15 chosen by the oriental Bishops to fill that See, which was not to be looked upon as vacant, since Paulinus, Collegue to Meletius, was yet alive. This Ordination renewed the Schism of the Church of Antioch. The Western Bishops, who of a long time favoured Paulinus, could not endure that a Bishop should be ordained while he lived, against the Agreement made with Meletius, That the Surviver should remain sole Bishop. They complained lowdly of that Inju∣stice; but those who sided with Meletius being the Major part, would not suffer Paulinus, and so nothing was enacted against Flavianus. The Death of Paulinus in the Year 389, did not put an End to the Division of the Church of Antioch; his Party acknowledged Evagrius for their Bishop, whom Paulinus ordained before his Death, and accused Flavianus before Theodo∣sius. This Emperour commanded him to go to Rome, there to be judged: But Flavianus ex∣cused himself because of the Winter, promising to execute the Emperour's Orders in the Spring following. But the Synod of Capua in the Year 390, remitted this Business to Theophilus and the Bishops of Egypt. The Emperour commanded Flavianus to repair to Alexandria, which he refused to do, and answered the Emperour, That if they found fault with his Doctrine he was willing to be judged even by his Enemies; but if the Question was about his Bishoprick, he would not dispute the matter but readily quit it. The Emperour admiring his Constancy, sent him back to Antioch, and suffered him to live quietly: His resolution provoked St. Ambrose, and the Western Bishops: But Theophilus endeavoured to appease that Quarrel by a milder way than a determinate Sentence: Evagrius being dead, no other Bishop was ordained in his room, and there were but few Christians at Antioch, who owned not Flavianus for their Bishop. But he did not communicate with the Western Bishops before the Year 398, when S. Chrysostom undertook to make his Peace with Anastasius Bishop of Rome, and with the Western Bishops. And thus was Flavianus acknowledged by all as the lawfull Bishop of Antioch, and ended his Days in peace, in the Year 404. S. Chrysostom often commends him in his Sermons. He de∣scribes his Journey to the Emperour's Court, to get a Pardon for the People of Antioch; and tells the particulars of the Speech he made. Theodoret also speaks much to his Advantage, and observeth, l. 4. of his History, c. 25. that Diodorus and he maintain'd the Faith of the Church against the Assaults of the Arians. He adds, that Flavianus did not then preach, but furnished Diodorus with Notions and Arguments from Scripture to use in his Sermons; but when he was Bishop of Antioch he preached himself. Theodoret in his Dialogues quotes some places of this Father's Homilies touching the Incarnation; he quotes a Homily upon S. John Baptist, upon the Theophany, and a Homily upon Easter: An Homily upon Judas's Treachery, a Ho∣mily upon S. Luke, and another upon these words. The Spirit of the Lord is upon me. None * 1.16 of these Homilies, nor any other of the Works of this holy Bishop are extant, unless perhaps some of his Sermons are among those that are attributed to S. Chrysostom.

S. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM.

SAint JOHN, Sir-named CHRYSOSTOM, because of his Eloquence a 1.17, was * 1.18 of Antioch; his Father's Name was SECUNDUS, and his Mother's ANTHU∣SA b 1.19.

He lost his Father when he was young c 1.20, and his Mother took care to breed him up like a Christian. He learned Rhetorick under Libanius, and Philosophy under Andragathius, both very famous in their profession. He first designed to follow the Law d 1.21, but soon al∣tered his Mind, and became a Church-man. He left Libanius his School to study the Scriptures, and had for his Tutors Diodorus and Carterius Superiors of the Monks, that were in the Sub∣urbs of Antioch. He was afterwards baptized by Meletius, and chosen by this Bishop to be Reader. He was so highly esteemed, that he was mark'd out by an Assembly of Prelates to be made Bishop, as well as Basil his Friend e 1.22. But knowing the Day when they were to or∣dain him, he hid himself, avoiding that Dignity with as much Care, as others sought for it with earnestness. About the Year 374, he retired to a Mountain near Antioch, where he lived with only one old Monk the Space of four Years; then he chose to dwell in a Cave for two Years, after an austere manner. The severity of a solitary Life, and continual Labour did much impair S. Chrysostom's health, which obliged him to return to Antioch, about the Year 380. There the great Meletius ordained him a Deacon, and soon after he went to the Council of Constantino∣ple, where he died. After his Death S. Chrysostom sided with Flavianus, who made him Priest, and having received that Order he gave himself wholly to preaching, and therein got such re∣putation, that after the Death of Nectarius Archbishop of Constantinople, he was with general Consent chosen to fill up that See. The Emperour was obliged to use all his Authority to make him leave Antioch, and at last he was forced to take him away secretly. Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria, whom the Emperour had sent for to ordain S. Chrysostom, had more inclination for one Isidorus a Presbyter; wherefore he secretly opposed the Ordination of S. Chrysostom. But Eutropius and other Officers of the Court upheld S. Chrysostom so far, that Eutropius (to oblige Theophilus to ordain him) shewed him a Memorial containing several Heads of an Accusation formed against him, and put it to his choice, whether he would ordain St. Chry∣sostom, or prepare himself for his Trial upon those Accusations. Theophilus chose the former, and ordained S. Chrysostom the first Day of March 398. This was the beginning of that hatred which Theophilus bore to St. Chrysostom, and which proceeded further than can well be believed, as we shall see afterwards.

S. Chrysostom being entred upon the Government of the Church of Constantinople, began with endeavouring to reform the manners of the Clergy, and then fell to reproving the Vices of the Court; and this got him the ill-will of many, for he was of a severe Temper not agreeable to men of the World; and his way of living was singular and retired. They found fault, that he always eat by himself, and would never appear at those Feasts where he was invited, which they looked upon as proceeding from Scorn and Contempt of others, though it was only an Effect of his Constitution and Weakness of Stomach, or of his great Sobriety. He discharged the Duties of his Office with wonderfull Exactness and Care, knowing that the Revenue of the Church is the Patrimony of the Poor; he cut off the superfluous Expences of his Predecessours, to increase the Allowances of Hospitals for the Sick. And the Hospital at Constantinople not be∣ing large enough, by reason of the great Number of Sick and Strangers, he caused several others to be built, and for each of them he appointed two Priests to take care of the Sick and Stran∣gets,

He particularly provided for Virgins and Widows. He constantly preached to the People▪ exhorting them not to neglect the publick Service. And he is said, first to have instituted solemn Processions in Constantinople.

But his Pastoral care was not restrained to his particular Church, but extended it self also to the Churches of Thracia, Pontus, and Asia. He pulled down some Temples of false Deities that were still in Phoenicia. To the Goths that were infected with Arianism, he sent Priests, Deacons and Readers that spake their Language, thereby to endeavour the Conversion of that People from their Error: He also sent Missionaries to the Scythians that inhabited along the Danube. He wrote to the Bishop of Tyre against the Marcionites of those parts, offering him the Emperor's help: But he never did the Church a more signal Service, than when he re-united the East and West, by reconciling Flavianus with the Western and Egyptian Bishops.

He assembled at Constantinople a Synod of Two and twenty Bishops about September in the Year 400. Eusebius, Bishop of Valentinople in Asia, came to it, and presented to the Council a Petition containing Seven Articles against Antoninus Bishop of Ephesus, the Metropolitan of Asia. He was accused, First, Of Melting the holy Vessels, and converting them into Money, which he bestowed upon his Son. 2dly. That he had taken a Marble Stone from the entrance of the Bap∣tistery, to use in his own Bath. 3dly. That the Pillars which remained after the Building of the Church were used to support the Roof of his own Hall. 4thly. That he kept a Servant who was guilty of Man-slaughter. 5thly. That he had sold the Lands, which were left to the Church by Basilina, Mother to Julian the Emperor, as if they had belonged to his own Estate. 6thly. That he had again taken his Wife, whom he had put away, and had two Children by her. 7thly. That a Custom was introduced by him, so as to become almost a Law, to take Money for the Ordina∣tion of Bishops, proportionably to the value of their Bishopricks. Antoninus appear'd at the Coun∣cil that was called by S. Chrysostom, where these Accusations were brought against him by Euse∣bius. They insisted particularly upon the last, as being the most important. Antoninus de∣nied all; and could not be convicted, because there were no Witnesses; Wherefore the Council deputed three Bishops to go into Asia, and hear the Witnesses that were to be produced by the Accuser. One of these three Bishops being Antoninus his friend, feigned himself sick, that he might not inform against his friend. The two others went to Hypaepae, a City in Asia, where they waited to no purpose for Witnesses, because the Accuser was agreed with the accused, either through fear of his Power, or because he had no sufficient Proofs. The Deputies, weary of wait∣ing, went away, having written a Letter, in which they Excommunicated Eusebius as an Im∣postor for making default. Sometime after Antoninus died, and his Death caused new Troubles in the Churches of Asia. In this juncture of time the Clergy of Ephesus and the Bishops of that Province made application to S. Chrysostom, and prayed him to come into their Countrey, to establish some Order in the Church of Ephesus. He came thither in the end of Winter, of the Year 401, and assembled a Synod of Seventy Bishops, wherein Six Bishops were deposed, who were convicted of giving Antoninus Money for their Ordination. The Heirs of that Bishop were enjoyned to return them the Money he had received: and they Ordained Heraclides a Deacon, Bishop of Ephesus. What concerned the Church of Ephesus being thus regulated, S. Chrysostom returned through Nicomedia, where he turned out Gerontius, who was formerly S. Ambrose's Dea∣con, but went to the East and was ordained Bishop of Nicomedia: He settled in his room Panso∣phius; and going on in his Journey, in every place, he took from the Novatians and Quartode∣cimani the Churches which they were in possession of.

While S. Chrysostom was doing these things in Asia, Severinus, Bishop of Gabala, a famous Preacher, (to whom, at his going away, he had committed the care of his Church) did all he could to get the applause both of the Nobility and People. This begot some jealousie in S. Chry∣sostom, who expelled him out of Constantinople after he returned; and this he did by the Sollicita∣tion of a Deacon of his, named Serapion. But the Empress caused him to come again, having re∣conciled them, though with much difficulty.

This Reconciliation was followed by another quarrel with Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria, an old enemy to S. Chrysostom. The Historians represent that Bishop as an ambitious Man, pas∣sionate, fierce, covetous, and cunning; who would never yield, but compass every thing he un∣dertook; who easily provoked Men to be his Enemies, and sooner or later would undoe them: He was no friend to S. Chrysostom, because he was obliged to ordain him against his will: but the hatred he bore to him broke out upon the account of three Egyptian Monks, Dioscorus, Ammo∣nius, and Euthymius, Sir-named the Long-brethren. Theophilus was very angry with them, be∣cause they reproved his Conduct, and received Isidore that was become his enemy: He condemned them in a Synod of Alexandria, assembled in 399, because they would not subscribe the Con∣demnation of Origen. After this Condemnation he went himself with Souldiers to drive them a∣way, with all the Monks that lived under their Rule. These poor Monks not knowing whither to go, because Theophilus persecuted them every-where, came to Constantinople, and represented to S. John, the Violences of their Bishop, beseeching him to have compassion on them. S. Chry∣sostom gave them leave to say their Prayers in a Church he assigned for them, but did not admit them to the Communion of the Eucharist. He only writ to Theophilus to re-establish them. On the contrary, Theophilus sent Men to Constantinople, who delivered to the Emperor a form of Accusation against these Monks; who in their own defence, accused their Bishop also. S. John

Chrysostom gave Theophilus notice of it, who answered him fiercely: That he ought to have known, that by the Canons of the Council of Nice, a Bishop is forbidden to judge of Causes that are out of the limits of his own Jurisdiction: That he had no right to receive Accusations against him; and that if he must be judged, the Judgment belong'd to the Bishops of Egypt, and not to the Bishop of Con∣stantinople. S. Chrysostom having received this Letter, exhorted both the one and the other to Peace; but neither were disposed towards it. The Monks accused by Theophilus, and some of their Brethren, perswaded of their innocence, continually Petition'd the Emperor; who yield∣ing to their Supplications, at last appointed Judges; who after examination of the Accusations against the Long-brethren, found them to be Calumnies, and so gave Judgment against some of the Monks that were the Authors of them. All this happened in the Year 401.

In the Year 402, S. Epiphanius, Bishop in Cyprus, (who held with Theophilus, because he was a great enemy to Origen) came to Constantinople. S. Chrysostom invited him to take a lodging in his House; but Epiphanius, pre-ingaged by Theophilus, writing to him, gave him this answer; That he was so far from lodging in his House, he would not so much as enter into it, nor joyn in the publick Prayers whilst he was there, unless S. Chrysostom first banish'd the Long-brethren, and condemn'd Origen. S. John having refused to doe it, S. Epiphanius designed to go himself into the Apostle's Church on the Lord's-day, and there publickly condemn Origen's Books, and excommunicate the Long-brethren with their Adherents. But as he was going, he met with Se∣rapion the Deacon, who told him from S. Chrysostom, that he undertook things against Order, and against the Canons: That he had ordained a Deacon out of his own Diocess, and celebrated the Eucharist, without permission from the Ordinary; and that he was about a thing that was neither just nor reasonable, and dangerous for himself, for he had to doe with a populace which would soon be up; and that S. Chrysostom would not answer for what might happen. This dis∣course made Epiphanius withdraw, and desist from his enterprise. The Long-brethren after this went to him, and complained that he condemned them before hearing, and without conviction; they shewed, that they had not dealt so with him, having every-where defended both his Works and his Person. Epiphanius reflecting upon this Remonstrance, and considering what Troubles Theophilus had engaged him in, returned towards Cyprus. At his going away he told the Bi∣shops, I leave you the Town, the Palace, and the Theater. He died before he got to his own Country.

After the departure of S. Epiphanius, S. Chrysostom made a Speech against the Disorders of Women: The Empress Eudoxia supposing that it was meant of her, complained to the Empe∣ror, and urged Theophilus to come to Constantinople. This Bishop, who waited for an opportu∣nity to destroy S. Chrysostom, came immediately about the beginning of the Year 403, and brought with him several Egyptian Bishops. Those of Asia that were deposed by S. Chrysostom, or were not satisfied with his behaviour, repaired likewise to Constantinople. Theophilus had his Apartment in one of the Empress's Houses; from whence he sent the Accusers of John to the Em∣peror, who commanded that both they and Chrysostom should appear before Theophilus his Sy∣nod, to be judged there. S. Chrysostom denied them to be his Judges; affirming, That it apper∣tained to the Bishops of his, and of the adjacent Provinces, and not to Strangers, to take cogni∣zance of that matter. Notwithstanding this reason, which Theophilus himself had alledged to a∣void being judged by S. Chrysostom, he held a Synod of Six and Thirty Bishops, in the Suburbs of Chalcedon, to condemn S. Chrysostom. One John exhibited Nine and Twenty Articles against him.

S. Chrysostom was cited to the Synod to answer those Accusations, but he sent three Bishops and two Presbyters, who in his behalf declared to Theophilus and his Synod, That he was ready to submit to any that might be his Judges, but not to Theophilus his professed Enemy, nor to the Egyptian Bishops, who could not regularly judge the Bishops of Thrace. S. Chrysostom ob∣jected in writing, particularly against Theophilus; because when he came out of Alexandria, he said, I am going to depose John: Against Acacius of Beraea, because he threatned him long before: Against Severianus and Antiochus, because of the quarrels betwixt them, which were publick and notorious. He so much depended upon his innocency, that he promised to appear at the Synod, if these four Bishops would retire: They did not hearken to this Proposition, but cited him to the Synod three times. He answered still, That he would justifie himself before a more numerous Sy∣nod; but he had reason to reject a Council, where his Enemies were to be his principal Judges. How∣ever, his Process was brought before the Council. Theophilus was present, and received the Me∣morials of Accusation which himself had made. One Isaac a Monk, whom S. Chrysostom had reproved, for going abroad oftener than Monks ought to doe, exhibited a Bill against him with Nine Articles: After examination of some of them, Paul of Heraclea, President of the Council, required the Bishops to give their Opinions: They all declared that S. Chrysostom ought to be de∣posed; and having delivered their Opinions, they wrote a Letter to the Emperor, and another to the Clergy of Constantinople, giving notice of the Judgment they had given against S. John Chrysostom. After this, three Bishops of Asia, deposed by S. Chrysostom, Petitioned the Coun∣cil for their Restauration; and it is probable that it was granted them. And, on the contrary, Heraclides, who had been ordained Bishop of Ephesus, was deposed. This is what Theophilus his Caballing obtained of the Council: the Acts whereof were extant in Photius's time, who gives an Epitome of them in the 59th. Volume of his Bibliotheca. They were divided into Thir∣teen Acts or Sessions.

The news of S. Chrysostom's deposition stirred up a great Sedition at Constantinople; the Empe∣ror commanded that he should be banished, and the People resolved to keep him by force: But three days after he went out of the Church of his own accord, to surrender himself to them that had order to seize him, and was conveyed to a small Town of Bithynia. His going away increased the tumult of the People, who both with Prayers and Threatnings addressed to the Emperor to call him back; which so amazed Eudoxia, that she became Petitioner for his return, and sent one of her own Officers to fetch him. When he was come back, he would not perform the Episcopal Functions till he was restored by a more numerous Synod than that which deposed him; he besought the Emperor to call one, and in the mean time withdrew to a place without the City: But the People, impatient of delays, led him into the Church, and he was restored by Thirty Bishops, and Theophilus was obliged to depart.

After this, it seemed that S. Chrysostom had nothing to fear; but of a sudden a new Storm arose against him. Towards the end of the Year 403, the Empress Eudoxia caused her Statue to be set up near the Church: The People, in honour to the Empress, celebrated some publick Games by that Statue. S. Chrysostom looking upon these as indecent things, preached against them: This provoked the Empress, who still preserved a grudge against him, and resolved to have a new Assembly of Bishops, to drive him out of the Church of Constantinople. It is said that the Saint hearing of it, provoked her yet more, by beginning a Sermon with these words: New Herodias is in a fury again; now she demands the Head of John in a Charger once again: However, at the end of that Year, Theophilus being afraid to go to Constantinople, sent thither three Bishops from Egypt; who being assembled with them that were thee at Court, and some others come from Syria, Pontus and Phrygia, they undertook to judge S. Chrysostom. He went to them, and desired to see his Accusation, or to know his Accusers, that he might make his defence about the Crimes laid to his charge: But these Bishops declared, that it was not necessary to examine, whe∣ther the things alledged against him were true or false; It was enough for his Condemnation, that he returned to his Bishoprick when deposed by a Council, and was not absolved by another Coun∣cil; because it was provided in the Fourth Canon of the Council of Antioch, That whosoever was guilty of this, could never hope to be restored, nor so much as be admitted to plead for himself. Elpidius and Tranquillus, who defended S. Chrysostom; answered, That this Canon was made by Arians; and that he was restored by those Bishops that communicated with him. The Bishops of the Council denied that the Canon was made by Arians; and insisted upon this, That the Number of those who deposed S. Chrysostom, was greater than of those that communicated with him at his return to his Church. On this ground they confirmed the Sentence of Deposition, which the first Council pronounced against S. Chrysostom.

By virtue of this Judgment, the Emperor, at the beginning of Lent, 404, forbad him to go to the Church: He obey'd, and left the Clergy alone to perform Divine Service. But he was not suffered to be long at rest, for upon Holy Saturday, Lucius, Captain of the Guards, came with Souldiers into the great Church in the Evening, and drove away forty Bishops that communicated with S. Chrysostom, all the Clergy, and part of the People: Then he placed armed Men about the Sanctuary, entred into the Baptistery, and misused those that were there. Some Souldiers that were not yet baptized, went to the Altar, and spilt upon their Cloaths the consecrated Ele∣ments that were in the holy Vessels. This Violence was followed by the Prince's Edicts against S. Chrysostom, and against those that communicated with him. The next day the People met together in the publick Baths, and were driven out by force: So that such as were for S. Chry∣sostom were obliged to meet in several places of the Town; and were afterwards called by their Enemies Joannites. They did not yet dare to meddle with the Person of S. Chrysostom, who was so much beloved of the People, that they were ready to take up Arms to prevent his being taken away. This Saint, unwilling to be the cause of a Civil War, got away from those Guards that the People set about him, and put himself into the hands of those that were to take him. He was led to Nice; and the same day that he went, which was the 20th. of June, there happened a Fire in the great Church, which burnt it to the ground, with the Palace joyning to it. Seven days after one Arsacius, an old Man of Eighty years of Age, Brother to Nectarius, was ordained in the room of S. Chrysostom. This Arsacius furiously persecuted S. Chrysostom's friends. This Saint tarried not long at Nice, but left it on the 13th. of July to go to Cucusus, the place of his Exile, where he arrived in September. He endured much by the way, but was kindly received by Dio∣scorus Bishop of the place. In the mean time Laws were published at Constantinople against those that adhered to S. Chrysostom; Three of them are in the Theodosian Code. The First of the First of September, l. 16. tit. 2. c. 3. It is against Foreign Clerks, who kept Meetings in private places. The Second of the Tenth of the same Month, is tit. 4. c. 5. of the same Book: By this Law those are to be Fined who suffered their Slaves to go to private Meetings. The Third in the same place, c. 6. forbids all the Meetings of those that did not communicate with Arsacius Bishop of Constan∣tinople, Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria, and Porphyrius who was chosen Bishop of Antioch in the place of Flavianus. All these Laws are against them that took John's part, and held private Meetings, and refused to communicate with those Three Patriarchs. About the latter end of that Year a shower of Hail of extraordinary bigness did much mischief in Constantinople; and the Em∣press died soon after: John's friends look'd upon both these accidents as Judgments from God for the injurious usage of S. Chrysostom.

The Patriarchs of the East having declared against S. Chrysostom, he could expect no relief, but from the Western Bishops, and particularly from the See of Rome, which had always been the refuge of Bishops that were unjustly persecuted in their own Country. To prevent Pope In∣nocent, Theophilus sent him a Letter by one of his Readers, acquainting him with S. Chrysostom's deposition. This being publickly known in Rome, 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Deacon of Constantinople, petition'd the Pope that he would suspend his Judgment, till he were rightly informed of the matter. Three days after came four Bishops, sent by S. Chrysostom, who delivered to the Pope a Letter from him, imploring 〈◊〉〈◊〉 succour, and that of the Bishops of the West; with another Letter from Forty Bishops and the Clergy of Constantinople; which declared, That S. John Chrysostom was condemned unjustly, and without being heard. S. Innocent being persuaded that Theophilus had not pro∣ceeded regularly, sent Letters of Communion to S. Chrysostom, as well as to the Bishops that condemned him; and declared, that it was requisite to call an unexceptionable Council both of Eastern and Western Bishops. Theophilus afterwards sent to Rome the Acts of the Council held against S. Chrysostom; but this altered not the Pope's resolution; who declared, that he could not ••efuse Communion with S. Chrysostom before a new Council had condemned him. Soon after Theoct••nus brought a Letter from Five and twenty Bishops, signifying to the Pope, that S. Chry∣sostom had been expelled out of Constantinople, and sent into Exile; the same was afterwards con∣firmed by another Letter of Fifteen Bishops, brought by the Bishop of Apamea; and by the Testimony of Palladius of Helenopolis, who was forced to fl•••• to Rome; and by Letters from the Clergy of Constantinople, which gave an Account of the Violences exercised against their Bishop, and the whole Church of Constantinople. The Pope, moved with these things, writ to S. Chryso∣stom and to his Clergy those Letters which are preserved by Sozomen in his History, l. 8. c. 26.

S. Chrysostom's friends every-where published these Letters, and wrought so far with Innocent, that he obtained of Honorius, Emperor of the West, a Letter to his Brother Arcadius, in the be∣half of S. Chrysostom; by the which he requested of his Brother, that a Council might be assembled at Thessal••nica, where Theophilus should appear as one accused. Three Bishops, Two Presbyters, and Two Deacons, were deputed to carry this Letter, with the Letters of several Western Bishops, written in favour of S. Chrysostom. But these Deputies were stopt at Athens by the Governour, and sent by Sea with a Guard to Constantinople. They were not permitted to enter into the Town, but were convey'd to a Castle in Thrace, where they were shut up. A Counsellor of State, called Patricius, went thither to ask for the Letters; they answered, That their Order was not to deliver them to any but the Emperor, and the Bishops to whom they were directed. Pa∣tricius withdrawing after this Answer, another Officer, named Valerius, was sent to take them by force. The next day Money was proffered them, to admit to their Communion Atticus, who succeeded Arsacius in the See of Constantinople. They refused it, and demanded to be sent back. When they could not be made to comply, they were put into an old Vessel with Twenty Soul∣diers, that carried them to Lampsacus, where they shifted their Vessel, and arrived at O••ranto, a Port of Calabria, Twenty Days after their Embarquing, and Four Months from their departure out of Italy. This Deputation was dated in the Year 404.

In the mean time S. Chrysostom being unhealthy in the place of his Exile, was obliged often to shift his Quarters, as appeareth by his 131st. Letter. But notwithstanding his banishment and infirmities, he still sent Priests and Monks to preach the Gospel among the Goths and Persi∣ans, and to take care of the Churches of Armenia and Phoenicia; as appears by his 14th. 123d. 126th. 203d. 204th. 206th. and 207th. Letters. But his Enemies would not let him be quiet, but persuaded the Emperour to send him further to Pityus, a Town upon the Euxine Sea: Im∣mediately Souldiers were sent to convey him thither; The usage which he endured, and the fa∣tigue of the Journey so weakned him, that he fell sick of a violent Fever, which carried him off in a few hours. In the place where he died, there was a Church of S. Basiliscus Martyr, where he was buried the 4th. of November, 407, having been Three Years, Three Months, and Four and Twenty Days in banishment: Aged Sixty Years, and Ten Years Ordained Bishop of Constantino∣ple. After his Death, the East and the West were divided for some time upon his account, be∣cause those of the West reverenced his Memory; and the others on the contrary look'd upon him as a condemn'd Bishop, whose Name they refused to insert into the Diptychs; That is to say, in the Registers of those that were to be mentioned with Honour at the Celebration of the Eucha∣rist. One would have thought that the Emperour Arcadius his Death happening Five Months after, should have removed the greatest obstacle, which hindered the Bishops of the East from doing justice to the Memory of S. Chrysostom: but Theophilus exercised his hatred against him, even after his death: He wrote against him a book full of Invectives, and reproachfull Railings; and prevented, while he lived, any honour to be done to the Memory of S. Chrysostom in the East.

When Theophilus was dead, the Spirits of the Eastern Bishops began to relent, and they be∣gan to be more favourable to the Memory of that Saint. Alexander Successour to Porphyrius in the See of Antioch, was the First, who in the Year 413, inserted the Name of S. Chrysostom into the Diptychs, and who by that means was re-admitted to communicate with Pope Inno∣cent. Acacius of Beraea likewise received Letters of Communion from the Pope, upon condition that he should not shew any hatred against S. Chrysostom afterwards.

About the Year 428. Atti••••s Bishop of Constantinople, inserted the Name of S. Chrysostom in∣to the Diptychs, and exhorted S. Cyril of Alexandri•• to do the same. This Bishop scrupled it at first: But at last 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Is••odore Pelusiota persuaded him to do it. Thus all the Churches did right to the Memory of S. Chrysostom, and Peace 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••estored.

The Number of S. Chrysostom's Works is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 great, that the Ancient Criticks durst not pretend to make a Catalogue of them: S. Is••odore and 〈◊〉〈◊〉, look'd upon it as almost impossible. George and Nicephorus say, that he composed above a Thousand Volumes. Suidas and ••••ss••••dorus af∣firm, that he wrote Commentaries upon the •…•…: From all which it is evident, that how many soever of S. Chrysostom's Works are •…•…, they are fewer than they have been, and so much the rather; because among those that we have, some are none of his, though they bear his Name.

The 65 Homilies upon Genesis, are the First of S▪ Chrysostom's Commentaries of the Bible, ac∣cording to the Order of the sacred Books▪ the Thirty two first were preached in Lent, in the third Year of his being Bishop. This Subject was ••••terrupted by the Festivals; for he was to preach upon the Passion of Jesus Christ. After Easter, he undertook to expound the Acts of the Apostles, and was near a Year about that Work: Afterwards he betook himself to his former Task, and finished his Exposition of Genesis, in Thirty four Homilies. These Homilies are Com∣mentaries upon Genesis, rather than Sermons. And he applies himself particularly to explain the Text of Scripture literally. The Examples of Vertues or Vices spoken of in the Text, which he expounds, are commonly the Subject of his Homilies. The Style is plain, and without those Figures and Ornaments which are to be found in his other Sermons.

The Nine Sermons of S. Chrysostom upon single passages of Genesis, are more florid, and con∣tain more moral Thoughts. The First is, upon the first Words of Genesis. In the Beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth▪ in it he treats of Fasting and Alms-deeds.

The Second is upon these Words of the first Chapter, v. 26. Let us make Man after our own Image: There he gives the reason why Moses speaking of the Creation of Man, uses the Ex∣pression, God said, Let us make; whereas he said of the Creation of other things, God said, Let them be: And there he shews wherein this Resemblance with God consists.

In the Third he makes some further Reflexions upon Man being like God, and upon the Do∣minion given to him over other Creatures; and there he answers the Question, Why Beasts fall upon and kill Man; and confesses that it is, because Man by Sin has lost the Empire he had over them. S. Austin quotes this Homily in his First Book against Julian, and produces a passage out of it to prove Original sin.

In the Fourth the three kinds of servitude which Mankind is fallen into by sin are discoursed of, which are, the Subjection of the Wife to her Husband, that of one Man to another, and that of Subjects to their Princes. He insists much upon this last, and occasionally speaks of the At∣tention Men ought to give to Sermons.

In the Fifth he shews, that those who live well purchase their Liberty; and declaims against those that refuse to assist the Poor.

The Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth, are concerning the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. In the First he shews, that Adam knew Good and Evil before he tasted the Fruit of that Tree. In the Second he says, that it is so called, because Evil is more perfectly known after Commissi∣on; there he also explains those Words of our Saviour to the good Thief: This Day shalt thou be with me in Paradise. The Third is about God's forbidding Man to eat of the Fruit of the Tree.

The Ninth is upon the Names of Abraham and Noah, where he discourses of brotherly Cor∣rection.

The Tenth Homily upon Genesis in the English Edition is not genuine; it has the same Preface with the Third Homily upon David and Saul; it is written in a swelling Style, and full of Me∣taphors, and quite different from the first Part.

The following Sermons are upon the History of Hannah, Samuel's Mother, in the first Book of Samuel; but it treats of several Subjects.

The Preface to the First is upon the Fast of the last Lent, and upon the Sermons which he had made since against the Gentiles; and after Flavianus his return upon the Feasts of the Martyrs, and against swearing. After this he resumes the Subject of Providence, which he was entred upon: he demonstrates, That it is God who gave unto Man the knowledge of the things which he ought to know; That sickness and death have their use: He takes notice that the Love which Parents have for their Children is an effect of Providence, and that Mothers are not less concerned in the Education of their Children than Fathers: And upon occasion of this last Re∣flection, he relates the History of Hannah, and he speaks of it in the following Sermon, and there∣upon he Discourses of Moderation, of Modesty, and the Reverence due to Priests, and of Grace before and after Meat.

In the Third, he speaks of the Obligation which lies upon Men, to give their Children good Education.

In the Fourth, upon the second Part of Hannah's Song, he reproves those who neglect Divine Service to go to Plays and publick Shows, and discourses of the usefulness of Prayer.

In the Fifth he shews their Errour, who go to Church only upon great Festival Days. He ex∣pounds the rest of Hannah's Hymns, and he speaks of the Advantage of Wealth above Poverty.

These five Discourses were preached by S. Chrysostom in Antioch, about Whitsuntide, after Fla∣vianus his Return. In this last Sermon, he mentions a Discourse upon the first Part of Hannah's Hymn not extant.

There are three Sermons about David and Saul. In the first, after a Declamation against those that frequent Plays to the neglect of Holy Worship, and a Declaration that they should be excommunicated, he treats of patience, and forgiving of Enemies; proposing for an Exam∣ple David's Action, who would not kill Saul, though God had delivered him into his Hands.

In the second, that Action is commended, and preferred before all the other great Actions of that King. He prosecutes the same Argument in the third Discourse, where he also complains of those that were given to Plays: He observes, that it is as great an Act of Vertue to bear an Injury patiently, as to give Alms.

At the End of these there is another Sermon against Idleness, which hath no relation to the Rest.

The Homilies upon the Psalms, are Commentaries rather than Sermons: S. Chrysostom does not inlarge so much upon Moral Topicks, as to give the sence and understanding of the Text. He follows the Version of the LXX, but he often hath recourse to the differences of the Ancient Greek Versions, and quotes even the Hebrew Text in some places to clear difficulties: There are some Psalms upon which we have no Homilies of S. Chrysostom, as the first and second; but there are upon the third, and following to the 13th; upon the 41st and 43d, and so on the 117th; and from the 119th to the last; which make in all sixty Homilies, which certainly are S. Chry∣sostom's. To these may be added, the Homily upon the thirteenth Psalm, and two others upon the fiftieth, which have likewise S. Chrysostom's Style. Those upon the 51st, 95th, and 100th, are more doubtfull; yet I see no reason that we should reject them. It is not so of the Com∣mentaries upon the 101st Psalm, and upon the six that follow, which are Theodoret's. The Commentary upon the 119th, belongs to some modern Greek, that speaks against the Icono∣clasts, and takes out of Theodoret's Commen••aries part of what he writes. There are also four Sermons upon particular passages of the Psalms, but they must not be joined to the rest; be∣cause they are not Explications of the Text of the Psalms, but Sermons upon distinct Sub∣jects.

These are a Discourse upon these words of the 44th Psalm: The Queen standeth at thy right hand, preached in Constantinople some Days after Eutropius his Disgrace, who had retired into the Church, but was gone out again. He speaks in his Preface, of the Advantage of reading the Holy Scripture. He describes afterwards how the Church was beset, when Eutropius had ta∣ken Sanctuary there. He relates what he had done to help him, and with what sincerity he had spoken, without fearing the Threatnings uttered against him. He observes that he was taken by his own fault, for the Church had not forsaken him, but he had quitted it: But yet it was no wonder that he reaped no greater benefit from that Sanctuary, because he entred not into it with a Christian heart; That when any Man flies into the Church to take sanctuary there, he ought to go in with his Mind as well as with his Body; because the Church is not made up of Walls, but of an Holy Union among the Members of Jesus Christ. Upon occasion of this Eunuch's Disgrace, he shews how little Solidity there is in the goods of this World, and draws a fine Picture of the Instability of Riches, and then concludes with an excellent Descrip∣tion of the Church.

Nothing, says he to his Auditors, is stronger than the Church; Let it be your Hope, your Haven and Refuge: It is higher than the Heavens, of a larger extent than the Earth: She never waxeth old, but still retaineth her strength and vigour, for this cause the Scripture calleth her a Mountain, to shew her stability; a Virgin, because she cannot be cor∣rupted; a Queen, because of her Magnificence and Splendour; and it gives her the Name of Daughter, by reason of her Union with God, &c.

Both the Sermons upon these words of the 48th Psalm, Be not thou afraid when one is made rich, were likewise preached in Constantinople. In them he recommends Alms-deeds and Hospita∣lity; and he toucheth upon the Necessity of being present at Divine Service.

The Homily on these words of the 145th Psalm, My Soul, bless thou the Lord, is a Sermon for the Holy Week, called then the great Week. The reason of that Name S. Chrysostom gives in the beginning of his Discourse, which is this.

This Week, says he, is called the great Week, because Jesus Christ wrought great Mysteries at this Time: He delivered Man from the Ty∣ranny of the Devil, he overcame Death, bound the strong armed Man, blotted out Sin. But as this Week is the great Week, because it is the first of Weeks; for the same reason Saturday is called the great Day: and for this cause many of the faithfull do upon this Day double their Exercises; some fast with greater Austerity, others watch continually, others bestow much on the poor: some apply themselves with greater Zeal, to the Practice of good Works, and by their Piety bear witness to the Mercy of God: Emperours themselves honour this Week, they grant a Vacation to all Magistrates, that so being freed from worldly Care, they may spend these Days in the Worship of God: They give honour also to this Day, by sending Letters every where to command the Prison doors to be opened. Let us also have regard to these Days, and instead of Palm-branches, let us offer him our Hearts. Then he explains the Psalm, My Soul, praise thou the Lord. The royal Prophet, says he, cries out Praise the Lord, O my Soul; why does he direct his Discourse to the Soul? to teach us that

the Soul should apply her self to the words that are uttered: For if he that prayeth doth not understand his own words, how would he have God to give ear to him? God often doth not grant our Petitions, but that is for our good; he deferrs some time, not to deceive us with vain hopes, but to make us more zealous and diligent, for the fervency of Prayer 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ceaseth when we have what we desired: so that to keep up our Devotion, God is pleased to with-hold his Gifts. He observes in this Sermon, that the Righteous after Death, live with us, pray with us, and are amongst us, &c.

S. Chrysostom writ a Commentary upon Isaiah: but we have only part of it from the be∣ginning, to the eleventh Verse of the eighth Chapter. Both the historical and spiritual Sence is set forth with much solidity and clearness.

There are also five Homilies of his upon these words of Isaiah, ch. 6. I saw the Lord ••pon an high Throne, and one concerning the Seraphim spoken of in the same place; they are moral 〈◊〉〈◊〉 upon various Subjects, and especially of the reverence due to sacred things, and of the dignity of the Priesthood; there is a very remarkable passage concerning the Ecclesiastical and the Civil Power.

Uzziah, saith he, went himself into the Holy of Holies to offer Incense 〈◊〉〈◊〉 being King he would usurp the Priesthood: I will, said he, burn Incense, for I am worthy to do it. Oye Princes keep within the Limits of your own Power: The bounds of Ecclesia••tical power differ from those of secular Government. The King rules over earthly things, the Churches Jurisdiction relates to heavenly goods. God hath committed to Kings the things of the Earth, and to me those of Heaven: when I say, to me, I mean to Priests. So that, though a Priest prove unworthy of his Office, yet for all that, you ought not to despise the dignity of the Priesthood. God hath made the Body subject to Kings, and the Soul to Priests. The King pardons corporal Offences, but the Priest remits Sins. The one compels, the other exhorts; the one imposes a law, the other gives counsel; one uses spiritual Weapons, the other sensible Arms; one wages War against Barbarians, and the other against Devils. But the Ecclesiastical power is the nobler of the two, wherefore the King receives the Priest's bles∣sing, and in the old Law the Priests anointed the Kings. But this King would go beyond his bounds, and extend his Power too far, and enter the Temple by force, to offer Incense: but what did the Priest say to this? Sir, you are not permitted to offer Incense. Behold this is a generous liberty; here was a Soul that could not flatter basely. You are not, says he, to go into the Sanctuary, nor to offer Incense to the Lord, that's reserved for me to do. King Uzziah could not bear this reproof, but transported with pride, he opens the Sanctuary and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 In∣cense. The Priest is despised, the sacerdotal Function is set at nought: The Priest is without power: for the Priest's right is only to reprove freely, and to admonish judiciously. Having then advised the King with that boldness which became him, and the King refusing to yield, but on the contrary preparing Arms to assert his Authority; the Priest crieth out, I have done what my duty commanded me to do, I have no power to go further, O Lord desend the Priesthood which is despised; thy Laws are violated, and Justice is overthrown, undertake for them.

This is the Account which S. Chrysostom gives of the High-priest's Constancy in the fourth Homily. In the fifth he speaks of his Meekness.

I have shewed you the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the High-priest; now take notice of his lenity, for we have need not of Courage only, but much more of Meekness, because Sinners hate to be reproved, and seek all occasions to avoid admonition: and so must be drawn and restrained with Mildness and Charity.

In the Homily concerning the Seraphim he speaks of that Celestial Hymn, Holy, Holy, Holy: He says, that formerly that Hymn was sung only in Heaven, but since the Lord appeared upon Earth, we are allowed the benefit of that divine Consort.

Wherefore, says he, when the Priest is by the holy Table to offer the Eucharist, he does not utter that Hymn, but after he has named the Cherubim and Seraphim, and the Congregation have lifted up their Hearts to God. This passage discovers the Antiquity of this Preface to the Office of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉.

To these Homilies should be joined the Sermon upon Isaiah, ch. 45. v. 7. I am the Lord, I form the Light and create Darkness, I make Peace and create Evil.

There is no Commentary of S. Chrysostom's upon Jeremiah f 1.23; but only one 〈◊〉〈◊〉 upon Ch. 10. v. 23. of that Prophet, where he proves the freedom of man's Will.

To these Homilies upon the Prophets must be added two Sermons of the obso•••••••• of Pro∣phecies, wherein he gives reasons why prophecies are dark. He tells us in the first, that the Prophets spake obscurely of the Evils which were to come upon the Jews; because that had they spoke plainly, they might have been ill used, and perhaps killed by the Jews. This he proves by an infinite Number of Examples of Prophets killed by them, for telling the truth. It is added, that Prophecies were dark, that the Jews might not understand them, till they were to comprehend them. In the second, he says, that the Event has cleared the Prophecies, that the Veil which covered them was taken off in the New Testament, and so the obsc••••ty wherein they were wrapt up has been dissipated. At last he observes, that the Old Testament having

been written in Hebrew, is the less clear, because Versions commonly make the Sence more obscure.

This Father's Commentaries upon the New Testament are more full and entire.

S. Matthew's whole Gospel is expounded in fourscore and ten Homilies g 1.24, and that of S. John in eighty seven. There are four and fifty Homilies upon the Acts, and thirty two upon the Epistle to the Romans; forty four upon the first Epistle to the Corinthians; thirty upon the second; a Commentary upon the Epistle to the Galatians; four and twenty Homilies upon that to the Ephesians; fifteen upon the Epistle to the Philippians; twelve upon that to the Colossians; ele∣ven upon the first to the Thessalonians; five upon the second: Eighteen upon the first to Timo∣thy; ten upon the second; six on the Epistle to Titus; three upon that to Philemon; and thirty four upon the Epistle to the Hebrews. It is said, that these last were collected after the Death of S. Chrysostom, by a Priest called Constantine who had been his Disciple: but there is no proof of this; and it is more likely that he writ them himself. Part of these Homilies were preached at Antioch, and the other at Constantinople h 1.25.

These Homilies consist of two parts: The first contains a Commentary upon the Gospel, the other a moral Exhortation to the People. In the Commentary he gives a reason of the Contents of the Gospel, examines all the circumstances thereof, weighs the words, and discovers in those places which seem most plain, great Numbers of fine things, to which no attention would have been given, had he not taken notice of them. He keeps still to the literal Sence, and of all Ex∣plications he always chuses, not the most subtle, but the most natural. He seeks for no alle∣gorical or figurative Sence. He useth no far fetched notions to prove his opinions; avoids all intangled and hard Questions, contenting himself to make clear and usefull Observations upon the History and upon the Text of St. Paul. He gives a perfect light to all the places of this Apostle's Epistles, which seem most difficult, and particularly to those, which are thought to speak of Predestination and of Grace. His expositions remove all that which at the first view makes them appear terrible and fearfull. Every-where God is represented as a good and mer∣cifull Being, and willing to save all Men, and who affords them all necessary means of Salvati∣on, Men are exhorted to answer that Call of God; since it is their own fault if they be not saved; for those that are damned damn themselves. He tells them often, that God requireth no impossible thing of them: That with God's help they may keep the Commandments, and pra∣ctice Vertue. S. Chrysostom finds these comfortable Thoughts in the passages of S. Paul, which seem most terrifying; and endeavours to prove, that they are not contrary to the mind of

this Apostle. The Exposition he gives of the most difficult places, is no ways forced; yea, it seemeth very often to be the most simple and natural. However, to my thinking, it is always the most profitable and edifying, and the fittest to be preached to the People, which are much edi∣fied by such Remonstrances as tend to practice, but can reap little or no fruit from Speculations a∣bout God▪s eternal Decrees, and other abstracted matters, that have but little Relation to the Go∣vernment of Life and Manners.

All the Exhortations that conclude S. Chrysostom's Homilies, are ordinarily about some points of Morality; as about the fear that men ought to stand in of God's Judgments, the Necessity of Repentance, the Contempt of Riches, forgiving of Enemies, Humility, Abstraction of the Heart from worldly things, diligent Meditation upon the Holy Scriptures, and God's Laws; an Abhorrency of Plays and Shows, Charity towards the Poor, Alms, and Hospitality; bro∣therly Reproof, the Duties of Husbands to their Wives, of Parents to their Children, of Masters to their Servants, of Lay-men towards their Pastours, Patience in Afflictions, that Holiness where∣with Men should come to the Sacraments; the Benefit of Prayer, and the Conditions required therein, of Fasting, and the Advantages of a monastical and solitary Life, Assiduity in divine Of∣fices, Attention to preaching, Sobriety, Purity, Modesty, Meekness, Clemency, Contempt of Death, and many other like Subjects, which he handleth with such familiar, and yet such solid and convincing Reasons, that there are no Discourses more capable of inspiring Notions of Piety and Vertue. He does not go about, as most Preachers do, to set forth studied Notions, which divert the Understanding, but do not touch the Heart. He goes to the bottom of things, searches the secret solds of Man's Heart; and not contented to have discovered and described Vice, he begets an horrour of it; He sets forth the most powerfull Motives to deter Christians from it, and the most proper means to correct it, and to practice true and solid Vertue. He stretches nothing too far, but distinguishes exactly the matter of a precept from the Advice therein contained: He is neither too meek nor too severe: He is neither too familiar, nor keeps too much distance; never complies beyond what is meet, nor terrifies to discouragement: In a word, his Exhortations are an excellent pattern of preaching to the People.

The Sermons in the Fifth Volume upon several Texts of the New Testament, are not Com∣mentaries, but moral Instructions, or Homilies upon different Subjects.

The First is of Forgiveness of our Enemies, upon the parable of that Debtour, to whom his Master remitted Ten thousand Talents, and yet afterwards exacted the hundred Pence from him that owed them to him. He speaks of the exact Account that Men must render to God.

Rich Men, saith he, must give account for the use of their Riches; poor Men of their pati∣ence; Judges of the Discharge of their Office; but above all, Church-men shall account for their Ministery; they shall be more strictly examined. It shall be asked of him to whom the Word of God was committed, whether out of Idleness or Flattery, he omitted none of those necessary things which his Ministery obliged him to speak; if he explained all and concealed no truth. A Bishop charged with the direction of a Diocess, hath yet a far greater Account to give: his Examination will be not only about his Doctrine, and his helping of the Poor, but especially about the Orders which he shall have conferred, and a Thousand other obligations of the Priesthood. S. Chrysostom speaking of S. Peter in that Homily, calleth him the Head of the Body of the Apostles, the Mouth of the Disciples, the Firmament of the Faith, the Foun∣dation of Confession, and the Fisherman of the whole Earth.

The Second Sermon of this Volume is against Dancing and Luxury; there he shews, that Preachers are bound to reprove Vice, and that they ought never to forbear, though their preach∣ing seems to be without Fruit: Then he begins to explain the Parable of Dives and Lazarus, making several moral Reflexions on the particulars of that Parable in the four following Sermons. The last is quoted by Photius in the 277th Volume of his Bibliotheca, where he speaks of an Earth-quake at Antioch, where he preached these Sermons. He observes in the Fourth, that God does not permit any to return from the Dead, and gives the reason of it.

The Seventh Sermon is an Exposition of the Parable of the Man that was sick of the Palsie; he uses Jesus Christ's Words, concerning that sick Man, and his Cure, to prove the Divinity of Jesus Christ.

The Eighth is upon these Words of Jesus Christ in S. Matthew, Chap. 26. v. 39. Father, if it be possible, let this Cup pass, &c. There he explains the Mystery of Christ's Incarnation, and in what sence he feared Death, and would have avoided it.

The Ninth on these words of S. Matthew, Enter in at the strait Gate, is against publick Shews: At the latter End of it the case of Dives is compared with that of Lazarus.

The Tenth contains an Exposition of the Lord's Prayer: This Prayer is not written in S. Chry∣sostom's style.

The Eleventh is upon the Resurrection of Lazarus. That Discourse is none of S. Chrysostom's, the style, elocution, and the very thoughts, are quite different from his.

The Twelfth is upon the Title of the Acts of the Apostles: where after a Discourse, concerning the Establishment and Perpetuity of the Church, which could neither be shaken nor ruined by the severest Persecutions; he shews, that a Christian Life, and good Works, are more to be va∣lued, than the Gift of working Miracles; he ends with a Commendation of the Bishop of An∣tioch, whom he calls the Successor of S. Peter. For, saith he, it is one of the Prerogatives of our

City is to have had for our Master S. Peter the first of the Apostles. It was just, that that City, which had the advantage of bearing first the Name of a Christian City, should have for her Bishop the first of the Apostles: But having enjoy'd that happiness, we would not ingross it to our selves, but consented he should go to Rome, the Imperial City: Yet in giving, we have not lost him, we have him still; we have not his Body, but his Faith; and having S. Peter's Faith, we may truly say, we have S. Peter himself.

He justifies himself in the Thirteenth for the length of his Prefaces; he shews there the Useful∣ness of Reproof, and treats of the Conversion of S. Paul, and of the changing of his Name, and reproves them that neglect to labour in their own conversion, under pretence that God will con∣vert them. God, saith he, forceth no man; he draweth only them that are willing to go to him; he is willing to save us; but that is, if we be willing to be saved.

The Fourteenth is upon these words of S. Paul, Rom. c. 5. v. 3. Rejoycing in tribulations. Here he shews what is the fruit of afflictions, and of persecutions.

The same Subject is handled in the following discourse, upon these words of the same Apostle: All things work together for good to them that love God.

The Preface of the Sixteenth is against such as frequent not the Assemblies of the Faithfull in Churches; and then he expounds these words of the Apostle, If thine enemy hunger, feed him; exhorting Men to forgive injuries.

In the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Sermons he makes many very usefull reflections upon these words of S. Paul, Salute Aquila and Priscilla. In these discourses we have an example, justifying how many Moral Thoughts may be suggested by a subject which of it self seems dry and barren. For what is there more simple in appearance, and of less instruction, than this Salutation of S. Paul? Yet by a wonderfull Art S. Chrysostom makes use of it for the explanation of many important instructions. As about the respect we ought to have for the Poor, Charity towards our Brethren, the small regard that is to be had to Nobility, the profit of working with our own hands, and the reverence due to Church-men, &c.

The Nineteenth and Twentieth Sermons are about what S. Paul saith of Marriage in 1 Cor. c. 7. from which he takes occasion to speak against Dancing, Feasting, and other profane Pomps of Weddings. He teaches what ought to be the end of Marriage among Christians, and how it is to be used.

Marriage, saith he, is a remedy against Fornication, let us not therefore dishonour it by filthy Pomps. Christians ought to banish from their Weddings devilish Pomps, filthy Songs, lascivious Consorts, undecent Dancings, obscene Words, Riots, excessive Laughter; and they ought to introduce the Servants of Jesus Christ, and his Priests; to have Jesus Christ in Person in the midst of them, as of the Marriage in Cana. Let no man tell me it is the custom; do not tell me of a custom, if it is sinfull. If the thing be Evil in it self, how old soever the use of it be, retrench it: If it be Good, and not usual, bring it in. But know that this custom is not ancient, but an Innovation. Remember the Marriage of Isaac with Rebecca, of Rachel with Jacob; the Scripture tells us how those Weddings were kept; it shews indeed, that there was a Feast more splendid than ordinary; that the Relations and Neighbours were invited, but there were no Fiddles, no Dancing, nor any other shamefull Excesses of our Age. Now at Weddings such lascivious Songs are sung, as teach Adultery, and inspire foolish Love; the Guests full of Wine do attend the Bride with impure Discourses. With what reason can you pretend to require Chastity in a Woman, whom you have taught from the very First day to be impudent, and before whom you suffer that to be said and done, which your Foot-men would blush to doe or hear? To what purpose do ye bring in a Priest to crave a blessing, and the next day your selves commit base actions?

In the same Homily there are a great many Exhortations of the same nature against such disorders, which are not less frequent in our days, than they were in the time of this Bishop. Afterwards he adviseth both Men and Women to behave themselves holily in Marriage; and not only to avoid Adultery, but not so much as give an occasion of suspicion: He proves that Second Marriages are not forbidden, though it is better to forbear, and concludes with a sensible Declamation against Adultery and Fornication.

The Twenty-first is upon these words, 1 Cor. c. 10. Our Fathers were all under the cloud, &c. After a large Exposition of which words, he speaks of Alms-deeds, and of the necessary Disposi∣tions to communicate worthily.

The Twenty-second is upon these words of S. Paul. There must be Heresies. He commends the Old Agapae, or Feasts of Charity.

The Twenty-third is of Alms-deeds, and the care which Men ought to have of such as are in want. This should be placed among the Sermons of Morality.

The Twenty-fourth is upon these words, 2 Cor. c. 4. Having the same Spirit of Faith, &c. He gives great Praises to Virginity, and to a Monastick life; which he describes in these words:

Doe you not take notice of those Monks who live privately, and dwell upon the tops of Moun∣tains? What Austerities and Mortifications doe they not practise? They are covered with Ashes, cloathed with Sackcloth, loaden with Chains and Irons, shut up in little Cells, struggling con∣tinually with Hunger, they spend their time in Watchings to blot out part of their Sins.

He observes also, that though Virginity is a super-natural Gift, yet it is unprofitable if it be not ac∣companied with Charity and Meekness.

The Twenty-fifth is upon the same Text; he opposes the Manichees, and exhorts them to give Alms.

The Twenty-sixth upon the same words, presses the Duty of Alms-giving.

The Twenty-seventh is upon these words, 2 Cor. Bear a little with my folly. He lays down Rules very judicious, both at what time and upon what occasions a Man may commend him∣self.

The Twenty-eighth reproves them who abuse what S. Paul saith, Phil. c. 1. v. 18. What matters it how Christ is preached? His Discourse is about Prayer and Humility.

In the Twenty-ninth he treats of the Marriage of Christians, and of the Duties of those that are Married.

The Thirtieth is upon these words, 1 Thess. c. 4. v. 13. But I would not have you to be igno∣rant, Brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not even as others which have no hope. He discourses of the way how Christians should bear with the Death of Relations, and confirms what he says by the Examples of Job and of Isaac.

The Thirty-first is concerning the Duty of Widows, on these words, 1 Tim. c. 5. v. 9. Let not a Widow be chosen of less than Sixty years. He there discourses of Children's Education.

The following Sermons have less relation to Texts of Scripture, being, for the most part, upon solemn Festival-days.

The Thirty-second is about Judas's Treason, where he speaks of the necessary Dispositions to communicate worthily.

The Thirty-third concerns the Festival of Christmas, which was celebrated for Ten years be∣fore in the East upon the 25th. of December, as it had been before at Rome. S. Chrysostom proves by several reasons, that this was exactly the day of Jesus Christ's Nativity.

The Thirty-fourth and Thirty-fifth are upon the Passion of Jesus Christ: In the latter he speaks of forgiving Enemies upon occasion of the good Thief.

The Thirty-sixth is upon the Resurrection from the Dead.

The Thirty-seventh is a Sermon upon the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, preached upon Easter-day.

The Thirty-eighth upon the Ascension, was preached in a Church of Martyrs.

The Thirty-ninth and Fortieth Sermons are upon Whit-sunday. In the former he answers that curious Question, Why Miracles are not wrought now, as they were in the time of the Apostles?

The Forty-first is of the Dignity of the Eucharist, and the respect we ought to shew to the holy Mysteries. This discourse seems to me to be neither of the Style nor the Order of S. Chryso∣stom.

The Seven following Sermons being Panegyricks upon S. Paul, were translated by Anianus, who lived in Athalaricus his time.

The Forty-ninth is of Meekness.

The Fiftieth upon the Conversion of S. Paul, was preached at Antioch after that upon the Ti∣tle of the Acts.

The Fifty-first is upon the Inscription in the Temple of Athens, To the unknown God, spoken of Acts, c. 17. v. 17.

The Fifty-second is upon the beginning of the First Epistle to the Corinthians: Paul called an Apostle, &c.

The Fifty-third shews the Profitableness of Reading the holy Scripture. It is dedicated to per∣sons newly baptized; there he extolls the Quality of an Apostle. It is one of the Four upon the beginning of the Acts, preached at Antioch before Flavianus.

The Fifty-fourth of Christ's Prayers and Qualities, is the First Sermon upon the Incarnation.

The Fifty-fifth is against those that Fast at Easter.

The Fifty-sixth against such as observe the Jewish Fasts.

In the Fifty-seventh he speaks of Alms-deeds, upon occasion of the Hospitality practised to∣wards the Prophet Elijah, who was reliev'd by the Widow of Sarepta.

The Fifty-eighth of the Pleasures of the Life to come, and of the Vanity of this World's goods.

The Fifty-ninth is against those that despair, when they receive not what they ask of God, or who petition for unjust things; he there occasionally speaks of the Duty of Husbands towards their Wives.

In the Sixtieth he compares Riches with Poverty; treats of the manner how Sinners are to be reproved, and blames those who call upon God against their Enemies.

The Sixty-first begins with an Exclamation against those that communicate unworthily: He shews that a Preacher is not to preach God's Word with complaisance, but to reprove Vice with fervency, because this is profitable for Sinners to make them know and confess their Sins.

The Sixty-second concerns Martyrs; there he proves, That the best way of honouring Martyrs, is to imitate their Vertues.

The Sixty-third is against those who teach, That Daemons govern the affairs of this World, and against such as doe not endure with patience the Chastenings of God; and, lastly, against those who are scandalized at the prosperity of the Wicked, and the misfortune of the Righteous.

In the Sixty-fourth he treats of S. Paul's action in resisting S. Peter; and endeavours to prove, that both did it by agreement for the instruction of the Faithfull.

The Sixty-fifth is a Discourse, or rather a Treatise against Jews and Gentiles, to prove the Divi∣nity of Jesus Christ.

The Sixty-sixth is another Treatise against those who were offended, because of the mischiefs that happened to the City, and the persecution of the Priests, and of the Faithfull. It is an ex∣cellent Explanation of that hard Question, Why there is so much evil in the World, if the Provi∣dence of God governs it? Both these Pieces should be put among S. Chrysostom's Treatises.

The Sixty-seventh is an Homily concerning the Two Paralyticks of the Gospel: There he proves the Divinity of the Son of God.

The Preface to the Sixty-seventh is about the Use that Men are to make of Sermons preached in the Church. He gives a reason why the Acts of the Apostles are read in the Church at Whitsun∣tide. Lastly, he shews that the Miracles of the Apostles proved the Certainty of Christ's Resur∣rection, and rendred it more famous. This Sermon follows that which he made upon the Title of the Acts.

In the Sixty-eighth, having reproved those who complained that his Sermons were either too long or too short, he gives a reason of altering S. Paul's Name, and that of Abraham, and of the Signification of that of Adam.

The Sixty-ninth Sermon was preached at Antioch, in the absence of the Bishop. He commends the Martyrs, and treats of Contrition of Heart, and of Alms-deeds.

The Seventieth is upon the Feast of S. Bassus Bishop and Martyr, upon an Earthquake that happened at Antioch, and upon the Words of Jesus Christ, Matthew, c. II. v. 29. Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly of heart.

The Seventy-first is a Panegyrick upon S. Drosis.

The Seventy-second is a Sermon of Penance, mention'd in the Ninth Homily of Penance.

All these Sermons now mention'd were preached at Antioch by S. Chrysostom, when he was Priest of that Church. There are but two more in this Volume preached at Constantinople; the first was after the expulsion of Gainas from the City; and the other was after S. Chrysostom's return from his first Exile.

At the latter end of the Fourth Volume there are Three Sermons of the same. The First was preached at Antioch by S. Chrysostom immediately after his being made Priest. This Sermon is a Panegyrick upon Flavianus, who Ordained him. It is the First that S. Chrysostom ever preached. The Two others in the same place were preached towards the latter end of his Life: The First at the time when they contrived his Deposition and former Banishment; the Second after he was recalled: In it there is an excellent Comparison of Sarah seized upon by the King of Egypt, and of the Church of Constantinople, deprived of his presence, by the Caballings of Theophilus an Egyptian Bishop; and a dextrous Commendation of the Empress Eudoxia.

The first Volume contains several other Sermons, preached for the most part at Antioch: The first Twenty-one are called Sermons of Statues; because they were preached at the time, and upon the occasion of a sedition in Antioch, in the beginning of the Year 388, wherein the People had thrown down and dragged about Streets the Statues of Theodosius, and of the Empress Flaccilla.

The first Sermon is upon these words of S. Paul to Timothy; Use a little Wine for thy Sto∣mach's sake, and often Infirmities, wherein he alledgeth several reasons, why God permits his Saints to be afflicted; he preached it sometime before that Tumult, which obliged him to dis∣continue his preaching. But the heat of that sedition was no sooner over, and the People of Antioch, astonished with the fearfull Threatnings of the Emperour, had acknowledged their fault, and turned their fury into Mourning; but he resumed the Chair for the comfort of that desolate People: And Flavianus their Bishop as a good Father, went to the Emperour to as∣swage his Anger.

The first Sermon of S. Chrysostom upon this Subject, is that which is called the second of Sta∣tues: There he bewails the Unhappiness of that City, exhorting the Inhabitants to implore the Mercy of God by fervent Prayers, and turn away his Wrath by good Works, to prevent the Danger that threatned them. This Discourse is very eloquent: Here are some Fragments where∣by one may judge of the rest.

What shall I say? What shall I speak of? Our present Con∣dition calls for Tears rather than Words, Lamentations rather than Discourses, and Prayers rather than Sermons. The blackness of our Action is so great, the Wound we have given to our selves is so deep, and so hard to be cured, that we have need to apply our selves to an Al∣mighty Physician. Then having compared the Misery of that City to that of Job, he adds, Seven Days have I kept silence, as formerly did Job's Friends: Give me leave to open my Mouth, and bewail our Misery.—I groan, I weep, not for the severity of the Threatnings, but for the excess of our Folly: For though the Emperour were not angry with us, and should forbear to punish us, how should we suffer the shame of our Action?

After this, he describes very elegantly the Happiness which that City enjoyed before that Mutiny, and the Misery it was now reduced to; and concludes this Description with these Words.

The great City of Antioch is in danger of being utterly destroyed; she that lately had an infinite Number of Inhabitants, will shortly prove a Wilderness; none in this World can help her: For the of∣fended

Emperour hath no equal upon Earth, he is the Sovereign and the Master of all Men. All we can do is to make our Application to the King of Heaven; let us address our selves to him, and call upon him for help. If we obtain not Mercy from Heaven, we have no re∣mission to hope for.

He observes, that God permitted that Mischief, to punish the People for their Blasphemies, and teaches rich Men what use they are to make of their Riches.

The next Sermon was preached when Flavianus was gone to Court to sollicite the Business of the City of Antioch: There he represents the Charity of Flavianus, who would undertake that Journey: He tells them the things that the Bishop was to represent to the Emperour, and bids them hope that these Remonstrances will be heard, affirming that he is confident of all through God's Mercy.

God, says he, will stand betwixt the petitioning Bishop, and the Emperour addressed to; he will soften the King's Heart, and put in the Bishop's Mouth the Words which he should speak.

He intreats the People to pray earnestly, that God would mollifie the Spirit of the Emperour. He speaks of fasting in Lent, affirming that right fasting is to abstain from Sin. At last he advises the People to avoid three Vices, Evil speaking, hatred of their Neighbour; and Blasphemy.

He goes on to instruct and comfort the People of Antioch, in the following Sermons. In the 4th he praises God, that the Christian's Affliction in the City of Antioch, had put them upon thoughts of their Salvation, and exhorts them to Patience: And in the last place, inveigheth against Swearing, and promises to speak of it all the Week. This Sermon was preached upon Munday of the First week in Lent.

Next day he continued the same Subject, encouraging the People of Antioch to bear with Constancy and Generosity all the Threatnings against them, and not to fear either Death or Suf∣ferings. He shews, that Sin is the only thing that Christians ought to fear, and he speaks again eagerly against Swearing.

The 6th Sermon was preached the next Day after, for the Consolation of the People that were intimidated by the Magistrate. He giveth God thanks that Flavianus was arrived before those that carried the News of the Mutiny. He tells the reasons that the Bishop was to use to the Emperour, and explains a Law, that was to be urged: He tells them▪ That Sin only was to be feared, and that Swearing ought to be avoided.

The 7th and 8th were preached upon Thursday and Friday of the same Week: He comforts the People, and explains the beginning of Genesis, which was then begun to be read in the Chuches in Lent. He discourses against Swearing, and reminds them, that it was the sixth Day, that he had preached against that Sin, and that it should be the last time: Which shews, that the 15th Sermon followeth this, for there he tells them, that though he had resolved the Day before to speak no more of God's Command not to swear, because he had sufficiently discoursed on that Sub∣ject the Days before, yet he found himself obliged to insist upon it, till he saw them reformed.

The 16th Homily was preached upon Saturday, in the second Week in Lent: Because, he says, at the latter End, behold we have passed the second fasting Week. He speaks of the fore-going Sermon, as of his last, though it had been preached some Days before.

It is very likely, that the 9th and 10th Sermons follow this, and that they were preached before the Judges, sent by the Emperour, had frighted the People; for S. Chrysostom says nothing there concerning the Desolation of the City, but handleth some Points of Morality, particularly against Swearing, and against those that refused to hear Sermons after Dinner.

The Officers of the Emperour having erected a Chamber of Justice at Antioch, to punish the Town for their sedition, and to condemn those that were most guilty; dreadfull was the Con∣sternation of the People, which made them think of nothing else, but how they might appease the Judges, and mitigate the severity of the Judgment. S. Chrysostom describes the Day of that Judgment, as the most dreadfull thing in the World: He says, that all the People expected nothing but Death, some fled, others hid themselves, the Streets were empty; that the rest of the Inhabitants assembled near the Palace-gate, waiting there for their Condemnation: That within the Palace, all was full of Men put to the Torture, or sentenced to Death: That Mo∣thers wept for their Children, and Sisters for their Brethren: In one word, That the whole City was in a fearfull Desolation, in expectation of all manner of mischief. In this sad Conjuncture of Affairs, the Hermites left their solitude to come to Antioch, to sollicite the Judges in behalf of the People; The Clergy also attended to move them to Clemency: And every one did his en∣deavour to work upon them, by all the Tokens of regret and submission, that can be given in such occasions. The Judges moved with these things, and touched especially by the Remonstran∣ces of the Monks, inclined to Mercy, and contented themselves to take from Antioch, the Quality of Metropolis of the East, and to forbid the acting of publick Spectacles for the recreation of the People: Having in the mean time sent to prison some of the Magistrates, and Chief men of the City, till they should know the resolution of the Emperour. This Judgment was no sooner pronounced, but S. Chrysostom opened his Mouth to return God thanks for the Success, as he doth in the 10th, 11th, 12th, and 13th Homilies, which were preached one after another, those successive Days after the Judgment. But some having again struck a new Terrour into the People, S. Chrysostom endeavours to settle them in the 14th Homily.

The 18th Homily was preached by S. Chrysostom, after Mid-Lent, as he saith in the beginning, complaining of some who rejoyced, that half the time of fasting was over, and of the Impati∣ence

which the Inhabitants of Antioch shew'd, because they were deprived of their bathings and pleasures. He takes notice, that they had not been deprived of them above 20 Days.

S. Chrysostom being fallen sick, appeared not in ten Days, but was no sooner able to go abroad, but he began again, and preached the 19th and 21st Sermons, that are particularly directed to the People come out of the Country to Antioch, about the Feast of Easter.

The 22d was preached towards the end of Lent. He discourseth there of the necessary qualifi∣cations, to communicate worthily at Easter; affirming, that it is absolutely needfull to forget injuries, and to be reconciled; from whence he takes occasion to speak against Enmities and resentments; he adds threatnings against such as had not yet left their Custom of Swearing, not∣withstanding his manifold Exhortations to this purpose in the time of Lent.

The last Sermon upon the same subject is the 20th, about the Return of Flavianus, who came back to Antioch before Easter, having obtained of the Emperour's Clemency, pardon for the City of Antioch. In this Discourse S. Chrysostom eloquently describes the wonderfull Conduct of Flavianus, the Discourse he had with the Emperour, the Answers of that Prince, and the re∣joycing of the People at Antioch, when they received the welcome News of the pardon granted them. This is the true Order of those 22 Sermons of S. Chrysostom, which is much perverted in the Editions.

The other Homilies in this Volume, are either Sermons upon some points of Doctrine, or of morals, or panegyricks upon Saints. The Sermons of the former kind are these: six Homilies of the incomprehensible Nature of God against the Anomaeans, the last whereof was preached at Constantinople; a Discourse of the Consubstantiality against the Arians, quoted by Theodoret in the sixth Council. A Discourse of the Judgment, which follows immediately after the last. One against those who like the Pagans, kept the first Days of the Months, preached upon New-years∣day: A Sermon of Jesus Christ's Baptism; a Discourse about the Devil's Temptations; six Sermons against the Jews: The Homilies of Penance, which formerly were more in Number, and are now to be reduced into the following Order. The first beareth that Title in the first Volume; the second and third are lost, the fourth and fifth are also right set down in the first Volume: We have neither the sixth nor the seventh, except that which is in the 4th Volume be one of these two, for it is falsly intituled, The third Homily of Penitence, seeing he says in the begin∣ning, that he had been some Days without preaching; whereas it is evident by the beginning of the 4th Homily of Penance, that he had preached the four first Homilies of Penance one after another without interruption. The 9th is the 65 Sermon of the 5th Volume of Penance, and of the sorrow of King Ahab. The 10th Homily is the 9th in the first Volume, and the last is the eleventh.

The Discourse against the Gentiles, is not a Sermon, but a Treatise which is to be placed a∣mongst S. Chrysostom's Treatises: But the Discourse of Baptism, is a Homily directed to the Cate∣chumens.

The Discourse of Anathema's is S. Chrysostom's, though some Criticks have doubted it. It is his Style, and therein he speaks of the Homilies of the incomprehensible Nature of God; and it was quoted near 400 Years ago by Philotheus, Patriarch of Constantinople; as written by S. Chry∣sostom. He proveth in that Homily, that an Anathema is not lightly to be pronounced against any, nor others rashly to be condemned.

The two Treatises of Prayer, are probably written by S. Chrysostom: but the six Discourses about Providence, which are in the same Volume are none of his, no more than the last of Pe∣nance, and Continence, which are supposed to belong to John, the Faster, Patriarch of Constanti∣nople, who lived long after S. Chrysostom.

The First of S. Chrysostom's Panegyricks, is upon S. Philegonius Archbishop of Antioch: the Second upon S. Babylas, likewise Archbishop of Antioch: the Third upon Maximus and Juven∣tinus Martyrs, who suffered Martyrdom under Julian the Apostate. These two Sermons were preached one after the other upon the 24th, and the 26th of January, after the Three first Ho∣milies of Lazarus, as is noted in the Fourth. The Third is of S. Pelagia a Virgin of Antioch, who threw her self headlong rather than lose her Virginity. The Fourth of S. Ignatius Bishop of Antioch. The Fifth of S. Romanus Martyr of Antioch. The Sixth is a Discourse to the Praise of the Seven Macchabees. The Seventh is a Panegyrick upon S. Meletius. The Eighth of S. Lucianus Martyr of Antioch, preached the next Day after the Feast of Christ's Baptism. The Ninth upon S. Julianus. The Tenth is a second Discourse upon S. Romanus the Martyr. The Eleventh is a second Discourse of the Macchabees. The Twelfth is a third Discourse upon the same Subject. The Thirteenth is of S. Domnina, and of her two Daughters, Berenice and Pros∣doce, who chose a voluntary Death before the Violation of their Virginity. The Fourteenth of S. Eustachius Bishop of Antioch. The Fifteenth is a Discourse of Helias and S. Peter. The Six∣teenth is of the Egyptian Martyrs. The Seventeenth upon S. Barlaam Martyr in Caesarea in Cap∣padocia. The Panegyrick upon the Martyr Phocas, and the Fragment of that of S. Thecla, which is in the same Volume, are not of S. Chrysostom's Style: But the Discourse upon all the holy Martyrs, is an excellent Sermon worthy of S. Chrysostom. Among the rest, this is one of the finest Passages there.

The Devil, says he, has introduced Death into the World, and God makes use of Death to introduce us into Heaven by Martyrdom. Martyrdom is a Com∣bat, the Martyrs are on the one Side, and Tyrants on the other: The Tyrants are armed, and

the Martyrs naked: Yet they that are naked get the Victory, and they that bear Arms are vanquished. What Wonder is this? He that is beaten proves Victor over him that beats him: He that is bound overcomes him that is at liberty: He that is burnt tames him that burns him; and he that dies furmounts him that puts him to Death. It is Grace that works these Miracles, they are above the strength of Nature.

The sixth Volume of the Greek and Latin Edition of Paris contains several Sermons, which Fronto Ducaeus, and other Criticks, have judged not to be of S. Chrysostom's Style. Fronto Du∣caeus passes this Judgment upon it:

We have collected in this sixth Volume some Sermons which are not upon whole Books of Scripture, but upon some places, written in a Style differing from that of S. Chrysostom's Works; for these Discourses are Dramatical and full of Prosopopoeia's, the Style is sententious and concise, with frequent Allegories; and we find not there those Similitudes and other Beauties so frequent in S. Chrysostom's Works; and yet the Authors of these Sermons lived either in the Time of S. Chrysostom, or not long after him. But we ought not to wonder, that some of these are quoted under S. Chrysostom's Name, in very ancient Councils; because they were already published under his Name, and Councils do not usually examine narrowly into the Authors of those Books which they quote: Being contented to debate the Questions offered, and to oppose to Heretical Errours the Writings re∣ceived in the Church; as did the Apostles and other Fathers who quoted Apocryphal Books.

That's the Judgment which this Learned Jesuit makes of the Sermons contained in this Volume; but if we would know whether it is just, we must examine them strictly one after another.

The First Homily, (the Author whereof shews, that there is the same Law-giver both of the Old and New Testament,) is not S. Chrysostom's, though Photius quotes it under his Name; for, 1. The Style is quite different from S. Chrysostom's: 2. The order and disposition of this Homily differs much from those of S. Chrysostom. 3. It is full of Allegories, which are very rare in S. Chrysostom. 4. Most of the Thoughts are unworthy of him. 5. There is great Confusion. 6. It both begins and ends in a different manner from the Homilies of S. Chrysostom. 7. It is obser∣ved at the End of that Discourse, that it was written in a Time when the Roman Empire was under Oppression. 8. The Blessed Virgin is there often called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; so that it is plain, this was not done without Affectation.

The two following Homilies upon two Places of the Beginning of Genesis, are unworthy of S. Chrysostom for the same Reasons.

The Homily upon these Words of Abraham to his Servant, Gen. 24. v. 2. Put thine hand un∣der my Thigh, &c. is more rational than the foregoing, as to its Notions, but the Style is too concise and close, and comes not near the easiness of S. Chrysostom. Yet this Discourse is ancient and worth reading, and I am apt to believe that it may have been written by Severianus of Gabala, to whom the following Sermon of the brazen Serpent lifted up by Moses in the Wil∣derness, is attributed in the Manuscripts, and under whose Name it is quoted by S. John Da∣mascene, in the three first Discourses about Images, by Pope Adrian I. Ch. 26. and by the As∣sembly of Bishops at Paris, in the Year 824. The Author treats of the Trinity, and of the Di∣vinity of the Holy Ghost. It appears both by the Style, and by the Beginning, that it is written by the same Author as the foregoing.

The four Homilies upon Job, are Sermons written by a Monk of the latter Times, who ha∣ving studied Isocrates his Oration to Demonicus, coldly imitates him in his four Discourses, where there is neither Wit, nor Order, nor Eloquence, nor Thought, nor Reasoning; yet he foolishly fansies that he out-did S. Chrysostom, in Point of Eloquence, many Bars length.

The fifth Homily upon Job, is the 22d of those Homilies, which Simeon Logotheta composed out of several Passages taken out of S. Chrysostom.

The Homily upon this Verse of Psalm 38. Man disquieteth himself in vain, comes nearer to S. Chrysostom's Style, and yet is not quite the same.

The Oration of the Turtle-Dove, or of the Church, is an impertinent Discourse, like the Trea∣tise, intituled, the Supper, falsly ascribed to S. Cyprian, from which the Author of this hath ta∣ken some of his Impertinencies.

The Homily upon the Prophet Elias is more valuable, and yet seems not to me to be S. Chrysostom's. I should rather attribute it to Severianus of Gabala, as well as the three follow∣ing, of Joseph, Susanna, and the three Children in the fiery Furnance.

The Homily of Seals written in the same Style with the foregoing, does certainly belong to Severianus of Gabala, being quoted under his Name by Theodoret in the third Dialogue, and by Adrian I. The same Character and Style may be found in the Sermons of Faith, and of the Law of Nature; in that of the Holy Trinity; in the Discourse of the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, quoted by Photius under S. Chrysostom's Name; in the Sermon upon Pentecost; in the Sermon preached before Arcadius Theodosius's Son, upon the words of the beginning of S. John, In the beginning was the Word, &c. in the Sermon of Circumcision, that of the Remembrance of Martyrs, and upon Jesus Christ's being Shepherd and Sheep; in that upon these words of S. Paul, My grace is sufficient for thee; in that of the prodigal Son, of Herodias's Daughters dancing; in that upon the Words of Matth. 13. The Jews being assembled took counsel; in the Sermon of the Ten ••irgins, the Homily of the Woman taken in Adultery, and of the Pharisees; in that upon Good-Friday, of the Man that was born blind, and upon these words of Jesus Christ, Matth. 6. Take

heed that you do not your Alms before Men to be seen of them; in the Sermon against Hypocrisie; in that upon the beginning of the Year; in the Homily about the barren Fig-tree; in the Ser∣mon of the Pharisee's Feast; that of Lazarus and Dives; and in that upon the beginning of Psalm 92, which is the 105th in the 5th Volume of S. Chrysostom, of the Eton Edition. The Author of these Homilies, writes in a short, concise Style; enlarges much upon Dogmatical points, and very little upon Moral ones: What he says is intermixt with Allegories: In a word, if one compares these Homilies one with another, and with them that are certainly written by Severi∣anus, he will find that they are very like.

The Homilies of the Theophany, and the Marriage in Cana, are two inconsiderable Discour∣ses unworthy of S. Chrysostom.

That of the evil Woman, is yet worse. It was composed by some modern Greek, who having read in History that S. Chrysostom had made a Discourse against Women, made one to represent it: In which either he, or some body else, hath put these words in the beginning, that Sozomen relateth: Herodias is mad again, and asketh for S. John's Head. The rest of this Discourse is a continual Repetition of impertinent things.

The Homily of the Canaanitish Woman, is also in Latin among the Homilies upon several passages of the New Testament, ascribed to Origen, and in the Collection of Homilies upon S. Matthew, Hom. 14th and 17th. But here it is in Greek, and larger. The Doctrine, and Thoughts of this Discourse are rational enough, but the Style is very different from S. Chrysostom's.

The Sermons upon S. John the Fore-runner of Jesus Christ; upon the Apostles, S. Poter and S. Paul; upon the Twelve Apostles, S. Thomas the Apostle, and S. Stephen; are unworthy of S. Chry∣sostom, not only for the Substance, but also the Style. Yet the last of them is something more rational than the foregoing. The Discourse of S. Thomas is quoted under S. Chrysostom's Name, in the sixth Council, and in that of Lateran, under Pope Martin I.

The Homilies of the Annunciation, Theophany, and the Resurrection, have no Relation to S. Chrysostom's Style.

The Sermon concerning the Woman of Samaria, is a Discourse, whose beginning is quite of a∣nother Style than S. Chrysostom's: The latter End is taken word for word from the 31st. Homily of S. Chrysostom, upon the Gospel of S. John.

The four Sermons of the Ascension, published by Vossius, are not unworthy of S. Chrysostom, though the Style is not altogether the same with that of this Father's Works: In all probabi∣lity, they are part of those Two and Twenty which Photius read, which he mentions in the 25th Volume, as well as the Sermon upon the same Subject, cited by Facundus, l. 11. c. 14.

The Homily which proves, that a Disciple of Jesus Christ ought never to be angry, does not come near to the Style, or the loftiness of S. Chrysostom.

The Sermon of the false Prophets, is a Declamation made by some Greek, rather than a Dis∣course really preached by S. Chrysostom, before his Death, as the Title proves.

The Homily of the publick Games in the Cirque, is a pitifull Discourse, not worth reading.

The Sermon of Christ's Nativity, Page 493. is quoted by S. Cyril, as S. Chrysostom's, in his Treatise to the Empresses, mentioned in the Council of Ephesus; there is no considerable difference of Style; which convinces me that it is S. Chrysostom's, or at least, that it was taken out of his Works.

The three following Sermons, the First whereof, is upon the Words of S. Luke's Gospel, ch. 2. Caesar Augustus made a Decree, that all the World should be taxed, &c. the Second upon the Answer given to Zachariah, Ch. 1. of S. Luke, and the Third upon S. John's Conception, are all written in the same Style, very different from S. Chrysostom's; they contain abundance of insipid Observations upon the Text of S. Luke, which one cannot read without Tediousness and Trouble.

The Homily upon the Parable of the Housholder, that hired Work-men into his Vine-yard, doth much resemble S. Chrysostom's Style; if it be not his, it belongs to some ancient eloquent Au∣thor, and ought to be placed among those Discourses, which though perhaps not genuine, yet are not to be despised. Some Fragments of them may be found amongst the Homilies, which were collected out of the Works of S. Chrysostom.

I think the same Judgment ought to be made concerning the Sermon, or rather the Fragment of the Homily upon the Publican, and the Pharisee, and of that about the blind Man, and Zache∣us, which are unworthy of S. Chrysostom.

A Discourse made to prove, that Monks ought not to use rallery or freedom of Speech, is of the kind and style of S. Chrysostom; there is a digression against those that kept Women with them. The Authors of S. Chrysostom's Life observe, that he wrote six Orations upon that Subject. This might perhaps be one of them.

The Panegyrick upon S. John the Evangelist, is not worth any thing, but is a pitifull Discourse made up of obsolete and senseless Words.

The second Homily of the Holy Cross, is written by the Monk Pantaleon, Deacon of Constanti∣nople, who lived in the 13th Century: The first Discourse upon the same Subject, does not be∣long to a better Author.

The beginning of the Homily of S. Peter's Abjuration, is likewise written by some modern Greek, who added at the latter End an Exhortation, taken out of S. Chrysostom's Discourse upon these words of S. Paul, Having the same Spirit, &c.

The Homily of Bread and of Alms, is a Collection of several Notions of S. Chrysostom's upon that Subject.

The Discourse of Easter, is very like S. Chrysostom's Style.

The Sermon about Jesus Christ's second Coming; is a Preface annexed to the moral Exhorta∣tions of the 25th, and 31st Homilies, upon the Epistle to the Romans.

There are several other Sermons in the Greek Edition of S. Chrysostom, printed at Eton, which were not inserted into the Greek and Latin Edition of Paris, as not belonging to S. Chrysostom, or else but Collections out of this Father's Works.

In the 5th Volume, page 680, there is one upon these words Psal. 92. Dominus regnavit, &c. and upon those of S. Paul, When Jesus Christ shall have given up the Kingdom to the Father, wherein he speaks of Baptism.

Another in the same Volume, page 740. of those Women that brought Spices to embalm the Body of Jesus Christ: Wherein the Author proves, that the Evangelists do not contradict one another, upon the subject of Christ's Resurrection: Both these Homilies are well enough writ∣ten, but they are not S. John Chrysostom's.

There is a Third in the same Volume, page 789 upon these words of S. Paul, The good that I would, I do not, but the Evil that I would not, I do. The Author shews there, in what Sence Ja∣cob was a Type of Christ, and declaims against publick Shews. This Discourse is full of Allego∣ries contrary to S. Chrysostom's Custom: It may be attributed to the Author of the following Discourse on these words of the same Apostle: My Grace is sufficient for thee.

The 123d Homily in the same Volume, pag. 807. upon these words of the Epistle to the He∣brews, When we sin willfully, there remains no more Oblation, is a Collection out of the 20th, 15th, and 14th Homilies of S. Chrysostom, upon the Epistle to the Hebrews.

The Homily upon the Nativity of Jesus Christ in the same Volume, pag. 843. where the guar∣dian Angels of Countrys and Provinces are discoursed of, is cited by Photius under S. Chrysostom's Name: Yet the Style shews it not to be S. Chrysostom's: It is more probable, that it belongs to Se∣verianus of Gabala.

At the latter End of this Volume are several other Homilies, yet more unworthy of S. Chryso∣stom: Viz. the second Panegyrick upon S. Stephen, the Homily upon Palm-Sunday, upon the Thief, upon Judas his Treason, and many Sermons upon Easter, &c.

The sixth Volume is intermixt with several Homilies, which are only Fragments or Collecti∣ons, taken out of the genuine Works of S. Chrysostom, such as these following Sermons; Of Cha∣rity, pag. 742. Of Meekness, pag. 750. Sermons concerning Fasting, pag. 883. A Discourse against those that slept upon the Saturday before Whitsunday, pag. 857. That the Salvation of the Soul is to be preferred before the Welfare of the Body, pag. 893. That Priests ought not to be upbraided with living at Ease, pag. 896. Three Discourses of Penance, pag. 903. That we ought not to weep for the Dead, pag. 943. Of Patience, pag. 949. Of the Soul's Salvation, pag. 961. Against those that abused Virgins consecrated to God, pag. 971. A Discourse against Hereticks, pag. 979.

Lastly, The 7th Volume from pag. 271, to 587. contains above a hundred Sermons upon all sorts of Subjects, whereof some are not printed in the Greek and Latin Edition of Paris; namely, those that are either unworthy of S. Chrysostom, impertinent and foolish, or discourses of modern Authors, or Collections and Fragments taken out of S. Chrysostom. The Catalogue and Titles are in the Table of that Volume.

I believe, that most of S. Chrysostom's Sermons, which Photius professes to have read, and which are not, now extant, ought to be placed in the same rank. In the 25th Volume of his Bibliothe∣ca, he speaks of a Book bearing the Name of S. Chrysostom, intituled, Remarks upon the Death of Jesus Christ:

Which, says he, contained two and twenty short Sermons, upon the Death of Jesus Christ: There were besides, as he adds, in the same Volume, two and twenty Discourses upon the Ascension, and seventeen upon Whitsunday.

S. Chrysostom did not use to make short Sermons; his are generally long and full; he abounded in words and notions which he could not easily contract. Yet Photius hath taken no notice, that these Discourses were not S. Chrysostom's.

But he says, in the 274th Volume, concerning three Discourses of the beheading of S. John the Baptist, that their Subject and Method were very different from the other Sermons of this Fa∣ther, as well as their Style, which was flat, and far from the Elegancy of S. Chrysostom. The extracts in the same place, which he made out of a Discourse, concerning the 40 Martyrs ascri∣bed to S. Chrysostom, do prove his Assertion.

Among those Homilies, which he abridges in the 277th Vol. there are several which are rejected, as not being S. Chrysostom's i 1.26, but Severianus's of Gabala, or of some other ancient Authors.

But one ought not to pass the same Judgment upon those which Theodoret quotes in his Dia∣logues, which are certainly S. Chrysostom's, and which are now extant, most of them k 1.27 at least.

Facundus l. 4. c. 2. quotes a Sermon of S. Chrysostom's, in Commendation of Diodorus, this Discourse was published both in Greek and Latin, by the Learned Bigotius, with the Life of S. Chrysostom, written by Palladius▪ It is a Thanksgiving of that Saint to Diodorus of Tarsus, who had publickly commended him. He there confesseth, that the Commendations given him by Diodorus, did put him to some trouble.

For, says he, with much humility, great praises do not less check the Conscience than Sins, when a Man finds not in himself those Vertues which are commended by others.

After that, he returns upon Diodorus the Praises which he had given him; and as he was compared with S. John, baptist, because of his Name; he shews that Diodorus deserved that Name better than he, having all the Vertues of that holy Fore-runner of Jesus Christ.

Lastly, Cotelierius in the third Volume of his Monuments, hath published an Homily under S. Chrysostom's Name, upon these words of Matt. 20. By what Authority dost thou these things? This Discourse is written by some ancient Author, but not S. Chrysostom; it has his Genius, the reflections are just, and the reasons solid. But one does not find that over-flowing Eloquence, nor that abundant fruitfulness which was so peculiar to S. Chrysostom, though it is not unworthy of him. There the Anomaeans are refuted; and he proves, that none ought to pretend to penetrate into Mysteries with humane reason; but that we ought to depend upon what the Scripture says, without searching further.

These are almost all the Sermons that are attributed to S. Chrysostom, which were printed in Greek and Latin. There are several other Manuscripts in Libraries, that falsly bear the Name of this great Saint, and which are not only unworthy of him, but also are not worth publishing. For in my opinion, it is equally prudent to suppress the ill pieces that are in Libraries, as to publish those that are worth it. It is a kind of Theft, to keep in obscurity from the publick those Monuments that may be usefull: But it is also a great imposition upon the World, to set forth such Books as serve for nothing else, but to weary the Readers, to increase the Number of bad Books, and to fill Libraries with unprofitable Volumes. I wish, that as Men prohibit the selling of bad Wares, so they would forbid publishing of bad Books, though they are under the Name of great Men. Had this Law been observed in the Common-wealth of Learning, from the beginning of Printing, the World would not have been over-whelmed with infinite Loads of bad Books, which cause so much Confusion in all Arts and Sciences, and particularly in Di∣vinity. This may be said by the bye, upon occasion of the vast Number of Sermons, which have been Printed under S. Chrysostom's Name. But it is less to be wondered at, that the modern Greeks, to advance the worth of their own productions, which of themselves were of very little value, would raise them, by the glorious Name of our Saint. That which is most surprising, is, that Men should have the impudence to give Discourses written by Latin Authors, the Name of a Greek Father. It may so happen, that the Original Greek of some Book might be lost, and that nothing might remain but a Version, as upon the Sermon of S. Joseph, and Continency quoted by S. Austin, which is in Latin, among the Works of S. Chrysostom: But it is impossible, that Sermons taken out of the Works of Latin Fathers, or which were visibly composed at first in Latin, should be written by a Greek Father. As for example, it were ridiculous to say, that the Discourse of Adam and Eve, which is made up of several passages of S. Austin, and which contains the 31st, and 32d Chapters of Gennadius his Book of Ecclesiastical Dogmes: It were, I say, ridiculous to believe that this was ever written by S. Chrysostom: And that Man is little ac∣quainted with the style of Authors, that cannot perceive, that the imperfect Commentary up∣on S. Matthew, is written by a Latin Author; and that most of the Homilies upon the Old and New Testament, whereof we have no Greek Originals, and which are found in the Latin Edi∣tions of S. Chrysostom, mixt with his own proper Works, were composed originally in Latin and not in Greek. These are, the second Homily upon Genesis, and those that follow, to the 16th, from pag. 206. of the last Edition, at Lyons, to pag. 222. Eight Sermons upon several Hi∣stories of the Books of Kings, from pag. 243. to pag. 250. Five Homilies upon Job, pag. 261, &c.

Two other Homilies, pag. 267. Two Prefaces upon the Psalms, pag. 269, and 270. A Dis∣course upon the Usefulness of the Psalms, pag. 272. Homilies upon Psalms, 9th, 14th, 22d, 24th, 25th, 26th, 29th, 33d, 37th, 38th, 39th, 40th, 42d, 68th, 71st, 84th, 90th, 93d, 95th, 96th, 121st, 122d. A Sermon upon these Words, Wisdom, Chap. 3. They seem dead in the Eyes of Fools, and of Men without Sense. Four Homilies upon four places of Isaiah, pag. 598th, 613th, and 614th. An Homily upon Jeremiah, pag. 616th. A Sermon of the three Children, pag. 617th. One of Sufanna, ibid. and one upon Zach. Chap. 6. pag. 619. Almost all these Discourses have the style of the Latin Preachers, they are full of Sentences, Antitheses, Figures, and playing up∣on Words l 1.28, which are usual in Latin Authors. One neither meets with the Eloquence, nor the Copiousness, nor Fruitfulness, nor Sublimity of the Expressions of S. Chrysostom, and the me∣thod is quite different from his m 1.29: In a word, the matters there treated of are not such as S. Chrysostom uses to discourse of n 1.30.

We cannot judge otherwise of the greatest part of those Homilies upon several passages of the four Gospels which are not in the Greek, viz. the 27 Homilies upon S. Matthew, in the se∣cond Volume of the Lyons Edition, pag. 465, &c. to 502. Of the 14 Homilies upon S. Mark, from pag. 503, to pag. 519. Of six Homilies upon S. Luke, from pag. 519, to pag. 529. Of that upon Zacchaeus, pag. 551. and of 13 Homilies upon S. John, from pag. 164, to pag. 172. All these Homilies are either Sermons of Latin Authors, whereof some are among those of S. Chry∣sologus o 1.31, or extracts from the imperfect Commentary upon S. Matthew, or Versions of some passages of S. Chrysostom, collected and stitched up together.

The 59 last Homilies upon the Statues, which are in the fifth Volume of the Edition of Lyons, from pag. 75, to pag. 188. are of this last sort as well as several other Homilies upon different Subjects, from pag. 287, to pag. 298, and from pag. 312, to pag. 335. Three Sermons of Penance and Confession, and ••••me Sermens of Fasting, and Alms-deeds, from pag. 361, to pag. 376. And lastly, common places upon Providence, Riches, Blasphemies, Debaucheries, and Pleasures, and upon some other matters of Morality which are in the same Volume, from pag. 582, to pag. 601.

The imperfect Commentary upon S. Matthew p 1.32, divided into 54 Homilies, is undoubtedly written by a Latin Author, who quotes the old Latin vulgar Version, and cites Apocryphal Books. There are also erroneous Notions, and contrary to S. Chrysostom's Doctrine.

The Latin Sermon supposed to have been preached by S. Chrysostom, after his Return from Asia, is written by one that designed to exercise himself; as also the Discourses of S. Chrysostom, and Severianus upon their reconciliation, which are at the latter End of the 7th Volume of the E••on Edition, and of the second of that of Paris. They rather belong to some Rhetorician, who de∣sired to be thought eloquent, than Sermons written in earnest.

And now we are come to the Books which S. Chrysostom writ in his Study, which are almost all collected in the 4th Volume. The first and most excellent are the six Books of the Priest-hood, which, according to Suidas's Observation, exceed all the other Books of S. Chrysostom, both for Elevation of Style, Beauty of Elocution, and Sweetness and Elegance in the Choice of his Words:

S. Isiodore Pelusiota observes, in the 156th Letter of his first Book, that all those that read that Book reap a considerable Advantage from it, seeing that on the one side this Book represents the Priesthood as an Eminent Dignity, not to be approached unto, but with much respect: And on the other side, it teaches Men to enter into it with great purity and innocence. It is composed with so much subtilty, discretion, and exactness, that as they who perform as they ought the Duties of the Priesthood, do find there a Picture of their Vertues; so they who negligently go about the functions of their sacred Ministry, can∣not but discover there the representation of their Vices and Sins.

And indeed there is not any one Book in all Antiquity, that speaks more nobly concerning the Honour and Functions of the Priesthood. It is in form of a Dialogue between his friend Basil, and himself, and divided into six Books. The first is a kind of Preface, in which, having spoken first of the intimate Friendship that was betwixt S. Basil, and him, and of the Design they had to embrace a reti∣red Life; he relates, that when it was noised abroad, that they would make both Basil and him Bishops, he did not discover to Basil his resolution to retire, and that having hid himself at the time of the Election, Basil was chosen and consecrated Bishop. On this occasion, Basil is introduced complaining of that Deceit, and accusing him of refusing the Bishoprick out of Vanity.

S. Chrysostom justifies himself from the injury that Basil pretended to have received of him, by shewing that there are innocent Cheats, which are causes of much good. He proves in the se∣cond Book, that he had deceived him to his own advantage, by giving him an opportunity of exercising his love to Jesus Christ after a most excellent manner, in feeding his Sheep. After∣wards he discourses of the Vertue, and Wisdom, which that Office required, proving how great the Charge of Pastours is by the great difficulty of healing Souls fallen sick, either by the Con∣tagion of Vice, or by Errours in Faith. Basil interrupting him there, and telling him, that therefore he was to blame, for avoiding the Cure of Souls, since it was the best way to justifie his love of Jesus Christ; he answers, That he did it, because he thought himself unworthy of it; but on the contrary, that Basil was very capable of it. And then to excuse himself towards those, who thought, that by his refusal he had offended them that had chosen him; he answers in the first place, That none ought to be afraid of offending Men, when they cannot any other ways avoid it, but by offending God: 2. He shews, that he was so far from disgracing them by his De∣nial, that he pretended on the contrary, that he obliged them very much, by not exposing them to the reproaches to which they might otherwise have been subject, and the false reports which might have been raised against them.

Is it not certain, says he, that had I accepted the Bishoprick, then those that love to caluminate might have suspected, and spoken many things, not only of me, but also of my Electours? They would have said, for example, that they had respect to Riches, or were blinded with the Luster of Birth, or won by my Flatteries. I know not whether they would not have dared to say, that I had bribed them with Mo∣ney. But, thanks be to God, I took from them all these occasions of Evil-speaking, and they can no more tax me with Flattery, than they can accuse these good Men of being corrupted. For why should he, that bestowed Money, or used Flattery to get an Office, suffer another to take it when he might have it himself? Again, what might not have been said, by de∣tracting Men after my coming to the Office? Could I have made Apologies sufficient to an∣swer their Accusations? Though all my Actions had been without reproach, had they found no pretence to blacken me? But now they have none, for I have delivered those that might have chosen me from all imputations; No complaints will be made of them; It will not be said publickly, They have entrusted young Fools with the highest, and most considerable Offices; they have exposed God's Flock to all sorts of Corruption; Christianity is now made a jest of, and they delight to render it ridiculous; Now the mouth of iniquity must be stop∣ped: For if Calumniatours do thus complain of You (addressing himself to Basil) you will let them see, that a man's Wisdom is not to be judged of by the Number of his Years, nor old Age measured with Gray-hairs; and that not young Men, but Neophytes are to be exclu∣ded from Ecclesiastical Dignities.

Thus he concludes the second Book.

To defend himself against such as accused him of refusing the Bishoprick out of pride, he says, that it is not to be presumed, that any Man could refuse so eminent a Dignity out of Vanity, and that such as are of that opinion must needs be despisers of that high Office. To undeceive them, he speaks of the Priesthood in these Terms.

Though the Priesthood is exercised upon Earth, yet it ought to be reckoned amongst heavenly Goods, since neither Man, nor Angel, nor Archangel, nor any created Power, but the Holy Ghost himself, established that sacred Order,

and made men think, that they exercised a Ministry of Angels in a mortal Body. Wherefore whosoever is raised up to the Priesthood, ought to be as pure as if he were already in Heaven, among those blessed Spirits. When you see our Lord placed, and offered upon the Altar, The Bishop celebrating the Sacrifice; and praying for the whole People dyed, and made red with his precious Blood, do you think that you are amongst Men, and upon Earth? Do you not believe your selves to be taken up into Heaven for that moment? And do you not put off the thoughts of the flesh? Do you not behold heavenly things with a pure Spirit, and a naked Soul? O Miracle! O Bounty of God! He that is above with his Father, suffers him∣self to be touched by the hands of all in this moment, and gives himself to be held and embraced by those that desire it.

Afterwards he compares the Divine Mysteries to Elias his Sacrifice, which caused Fire to come down from Heaven to consume the Victims. He saith, that the Bishop in like manner causeth by his Prayers, not Fire from Heaven, but the Holy Ghost to descend upon the Altar. Having thus exalted the Dignity of the Priesthood, because of the Power which they have to consecrate the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, he discourses of their Power of binding and loosing Sinners, which is not less honourable, nor less usefull to the Salvation of Men.

For, saith he, living as yet upon the Earth, they dispose of the things of Heaven, and they have received a Power which God would give neither to Angels, nor to Archangels; having said unto Men, and not to them, What you shall bind on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on Earth, shall be loosed in Heaven. Temporal Princes have a power to bind, but that is the Body only, whereas Episcopal Power bindeth the Soul, and reacheth unto Heaven, because God ratifieth above, what the Bishops do here below, and the Master confirmeth the Sentence of his Servants. This Power is as much above the Temporal, as Heaven is nobler than the Earth, and the Soul than the Body. It were madness to despise a Power, without which we could hope for no Salvation, nor the possession of the promised Goods: For if none can enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, unless he be first regenerated with Water, and the Holy Ghost: And if he that eateth not the Flesh of the Lord, and drinketh not his Blood, is deprived of Eternal Life: And if it be these holy Hands, I mean by the hands of Bishops, that all these things are done: How can either the Fire of Hell be avoided, or the Crowns prepared for us in Heaven, be obtained without their help? They and only they, are intrusted by God with these spiritual Births, and that regeneration which is wrought by Baptism: By them we put on Christ, we are united to the Son of God, and be∣come Members of his sacred Body. Bishops do not judge of the Leprosie of the Body, as the Priests did under the old Law; they judge of that of the Soul, and they do not onely enquire whether Souls be purified, but they have power also to purify them: Wherefore those that despise them, commit a much greater Crime, and are worthy of a much severer Chastisement than Dathan, and his Companions.

Having thus exalted the Dignity of the Priesthood, he discovers the Dangers that attend this Office on all sides: He compares a Bishop that has the Care of a Diocess, with a Pilot that hath the Charge of a Ship.

But a Bishop, saith he, is more agitated with Cares, than the Sea with Winds and Storms: The first Rock he meets with, is vain Glory, Anger, Peevishness, Envy, Quarrelling, Calumnies, Accusations, Lying, Hypocrisies, Treachery, and precipitate Violence against the Innocent; joy to see those that serve the Church, neglect their Duty; and sorrow to see them discharge it worthily; love of Praise, desire of Honour, which is one of the most pernicious passions of the Soul; Discourses where pleasure is more looked after, than the profit of the Hearers, servile Flatteries, base Complacency, Contempt of the Poor, degenerate Ci∣vilities towards rich men without reason, favours ill-bestowed, which prove hurtfull both to the giver and to the receiver; guilty fear, bashfulness in speaking, false modesty, silence, cow∣ardice and fear of reproving great Men. There is no slavery equal to ours, which makes us do even shamefull things to please Women. They have got such Power, that they give and take away Bishopricks, even to whom, and from whom they please: Hence it is, that all things are turned upside down: Those that should obey, will be Directours of those that are to command. Yet I pretend not to tax all Bishops with the Crimes now mentioned, there being many; I say many, who have not been caught in these snares, and who far exceed those in number, that are unhappily fallen into them. Neither will I say, that the Episcopal Dig∣nity is the cause of these Evils, I am not so extravagant as to have any such thought. The Sword is not the cause of Murder, nor Wine of Drunkenness, &c. All wise Men accuse and punish such as abuse God's Gifts, as the true Authors of those Abuses: And the Episcopal Dig∣nity is so far from being guilty of these Evils, that it may rather complain, that Men do not exercise it well: We are those whom it may upbraid. Since we dishonour it as much as in us lies, when we admit the first that comes, who having not examined their own strength, nor considered the greatness and importance of that Office, receive it readily, as soon as it is offered. And when they are obliged to act, being blinded with Darkness, they ingage their People in a thousand Disorders. For, from whence think you, do so many Troubles arise in the Church? I see no other Spring of them besides the want of Circumspection, and Choice in the Election of Bishops.

He Discourses afterwards of the necessary qualities in a Bishop, and affirms, that the first is to have no desire to that Dignity, which ought to be looked upon with respect, and such a

moderation as may inspire Men with a Desire to avoid so important and difficult an Office: And also, that when a Man engages in it, he should not stay for the Judgment of others, to quit it, but having committed faults unworthy of the same, he should depose himself.

Per∣haps, says he, it will be objected to me, that I contradict the Words of S. Paul, That he that desireth to be a Bishop, desireth a good work, but I am so far from opposing, that I do only follow them, since it is the desire of the Power and not of the Work which I condemn.

The second quality noted by S. Chrysostom as requisite in a Bishop, is to be clear-sighted and vigilant, because he lives not for himself, but for a great People. The Third, according to his Opinion, is Meekness; he observes, That a Bishop ought not to be Peevish, Violent or Angry; and that whatsoever his other Vertues be, if these be in him, he is not worthy to be a Bishop. He saith further, That the Vices of a Bishop are of worse consequence than those of a private Man, be∣cause, when they are once discovered, they cause a general Scandal, and draw others by their ex∣ample; and besides, the least faults of a Bishop, being magnified by envious Men, will utterly ruine his Reputation. In the next place, he gives an account of the Disputes and Dissentions which commonly attend the Election of a Bishop, and that the reason of it is, because they do not all agree in the only design which they ought to have, which is to chuse the Wisest and most Vertuous.

They, says he, have all different Pretences of promoting a Man to an Office; one will have this Man because he is of a Noble Family; another votes for the other, because he is rich, and a third endeavours to advance his Friend, or his Kinsman: This last goes by Ca∣balling and getting of Favour: No Man chooses the most worthy; no Man hath respect either to Vertue or Merit.

Then he concludes this Book by a Description of the three main duties of a Bishop, viz. The care of Widows, of Virgins consecrated to God, and their obligation to do Justice to the People, and to help them in their necessities.

S. Chrysostom having ended this Discourse, Basil told him, That had he sued for that Dignity, his fear might have been rational, but having been chosen when he sought it not, he ought to think himself secure in accepting it. S. Chrysostom answers, That not only those that seek for Ecclesiastical Promotions thro' Ambition, but also those that do not discharge them well shall be severely punished, because they should have refus'd them, knowing that they were above their Capacity; and that even those shall be without excuse, who through insufficiency do not per∣form their Functions in the Church as they ought, under pretence that they were forced to ac∣cept of them; neither shall they be acquitted before God, who chuse Insufficient Men, by saying that they were deceived, and that they knew them not. This ought to oblige those that are to chuse, to consider well what choice they make? and those that are chosen, to examine them∣selves, Whether they are capable of the Dignity to which they are to be promoted. He discourses afterwards of a Bishop's Learning, that being to preach God's word with Strength and Knowledge, to refute Pagans, Jews and Hereticks, and to instruct the Faithful, he hath great need of Learn∣ing, of Prudence and Eloquence.

He goes on in the next Book to speak of the Conditions which are necessary to exercise the Mi∣nistry of God's Word, as we ought: He observes, That Commendation is not to be regarded, and that Envy and Malice is to be despised; but that a good Reputation is to be maintain'd by constant labour: That a good Bishop ought not to be proud for being praised, nor dejected when he is blamed; and that his only aim in his Discourses should be to please God.

This, saith he, is the only Rule, and the only Object which they ought to propose to themselves in this excellent Ministry, and not to be applauded and praised. If Men do commend them, let them not reject their Commendations; if they do not, let them not desire it, nor be concerned at the omission: This is sufficient comfort for him in his Labour; yea, the greatest he can have, if he knows in his Conscience, that he hath studied his Discourses for no other end, than that they might be acceptable to God only; adding, that he cannot be envious against, nor jealous of those who have more talents than himself.

In the last Book he proves, That Bishops have need of a higher degree of Vertue than Monks, because they are exposed to many more dangers; and that it is easier to live well in a Solitude than as a Bishop; yea, that whatsoever Vertues Monks may have, yet they are not fit to be Bishops, because the accidents of a Bishop's life may easily excite those Vices and Infirmities which were hid in Solitude. Lastly, he declares, That the trouble he was in, when they spake of making him Bishop, made him resolve to hide himself. He sets forth this trouble by two Comparisons; the one by describing the vexation which a Princess, incomparable both for Beauty and Vertue, might be in, who being passionately beloved by a Prince, should be forced to mar∣ry a mean and contemptible Man; the other, by describing the astonishment of a Clown, that was forced to take upon him the Conduct of both a great Land-Army, and of a Navy that was ready to give Battel to a dreadful Enemy. He concludes by comforting Basil, who was af∣flicted to see himself ingaged in so hard an Employment, and loaded with so heavy a Bur∣den.

Some say, that he writ these excellent Books when he was very young, which is not likely. Others think with Socrates, That he composed them while he was a Deacon; but it seems ra∣ther, that he made them in his Retirement, before he was ordained Deacon, about the Year 376.

The three Books in defence of a Monastical Life, against those that blamed that state, were the first fruits of S. Chrysostom's Retreat. In the first he argues for a Monastical way of life, because of the usefulness and necessity of separating from the World. In the Second he answers the Gentiles, who complained that their Children forsook them to retire into desart places; and then he comforts the Christians who were troubled to see themselves bereaved of their Children that embraced a Solitary Life, to dwell in Wildernesses. He affirms in these Books, That a Monk is more glorious, more powerful and richer than a Man of the World; representing the great difficulty of saving our selves in the World, and how hard it is to bring up Children to Christianity; and comparing the condition of a Monk with that of Saints and Angels.

The short Discourse upon the comparison of a Monk with a Prince, is upon the same Subject. He shews, That Men are mistaken, who preferr the condition of Kings before that of Monks and retired Men. First, Because the greatness of Kings ends with them, whereas the advanta∣ges of a retired Life continues after death. 2. Because the advantages of Retirement are much more considerable than the Fortune of Great Men. 3. Because it is more glorious for a Man to command his Passions, than to rule whole Nations. 4. Because the War of a Monk is nobler than that of a great Captain, and his Victory more certain; the one fights against invisible Pow∣ers, and the other against mortal Men; the one engages for the defence of Piety, and the ho∣nour of God, the other for his own Interest or Glory. 5. Because a Prince is a charge to him∣self and to others by reason of those many things which he needs; whereas a Monk wants no∣thing, does good to all, and by his Prayers obtains those Graces, which the most powerful Prin∣ces cannot give. 6. Because the loss of Piety may sooner be repaired than the loss of a Kingdom. Lastly, Because, after death, a Monk goeth in splendor to meet Jesus Christ, and entreth im∣mediately into Heaven; whereas, tho' a King seems to have ruled his Kingdom with Justice and Equity (a thing very rare) yet they shall be less glorious and not so happy, there being a great difference in point of Holiness, between a good King, and a holy Monk, who hath bestowed all his time and care upon praising God: But if this King hath lived ill, who can express the great∣ness of those punishments that attend him? He concludeth in these words;

Let us not admire their Riches, nor preferr their happiness before that of these poor Monks. Let us never say, that this rich Man is happy, because he is cloathed with sumptuous Apparel, carried in a fine Coach, and followed by many Footman: These Riches and great Pomps last but for a time, and all the Felicity that attends them ends with the Life, whereas the Happiness of Monks endures for ever.

It was likewise in his Solitude that he writ the two Books of Compunction of Heart, whereof the first is dedicated to Demetrius, and the second to Stelechius. In these Books he discourses of the necessity and conditions of a true and sincere Repentance; affirming, That Christians ought to have their sins always in view, to abhorr them with all their Heart, to lament, and continually beg of God the forgiveness of them: That this sorrow ought to be a motion of that Charity which the Holy Ghost inspireth into our Hearts, and to be animated with the fire of a Divine Love, which consumeth sin, and is accompanied with a Spirit of Mortification and Dis∣interessedness from the Goods of this World, with an esteem of the Treasures of Heaven, and of Spiritual Vertues. He saith in the first Book, That it is not Grace only which makes us do good, since we ought our selves to contribute on our part, all that depends upon our Wills and Strength; where∣fore, saith he, God's Grace is given to every one of us, but it abideth only in the Hearts of them that keep the Commandments, and departeth from them that correspond not with it; neither doth it en∣ter into their Souls, who begin not to turn to the Lord. When God converted S. Paul, he foresaw his good Will before he gave him his Grace.

The Three Books of Providence were composed by S. Chrysostom, when he came out of his Solitude, and returned to Antioch. There he comforteth a Friend of his, one Stagirius, who having quitted the World, was so tormented with an Evil Spirit, that he was ready to fall into Despair; exhorting him to look upon that affliction as a Grace of God rather than a Punishment; for as much as it appears by the most notable Examples both of the old and of the new Law; that from Adam to S. Paul, Troubles and Afflictions have commonly been the lot of the Saints and Righteous Men: For this reason these Books are intituled, Of Providence, because they clear that great Question which so much perplexed the learned Gentiles, Why the Righteous are afflicted and persecuted if there be a Providence over-ruling the things of the World? He sheweth there, that this Question hath no difficulty, if Men believe, that there is another Life, a Heaven and a Hell: For, saith he, since every one is punished or rewarded in another World, to what end are we con∣cerned at what happens in this? If wicked Men only were persecuted here, we should easily be∣lieve, that out of this World there is neither Punishments nor Rewards; and were there none but good Men in affliction, Vertue might be looked upon as the cause of Adversity, and Crimes the reason of Prosperity. Of necessity therefore there must be in this World righteous and wicked Men, some happy and others unhappy. He adds, That by God's permission the Righ∣teous are afflicted, to expiate their sins, and to correct them for their faults. He saith further, That God makes use of the Righteous Man's Fear, to oblige others to look to themselves, and to mind their own Salvation. But why doth it happen, That such as lived well before they were tempted by Afflictions should fall into sin, when Temptation cometh? S. Chrysostom an∣swereth, First, That many seem to be Righteous before Men, who are great Criminals before

God, that searcheth the Hearts. Secondly, That God permits the most righteous to fall into sin, to humble them, to keep them from Pride, and from an Opinion of their own Merit; and to put them in mind, that if they have any thing that is good, it is not of themselves, but of the Grace of Jesus Christ.

The Book of Virginity is written with much Prudence and Wisdom: For, whereas most of the Authors that have written of Virginity, could not forbear, whilst they commended this Ver∣tue, to condemn marriage, or at least, to speak slightingly of it. On the contrary, S. Chrysostom answereth, at first, those Hereticks that condemned Matrimony; and proveth, that their Virgini∣ty will not only be unprofitable, but also pernicious; adding withall, that as many as condemn Marriage, are Despisers of Virginity: It being a greater advantage to be what it is, a good thing, a nobler and more excellent than another good thing, than simply a Vertue in oppositi∣on to Vice.

I commend Matrimony, saith he, it is the Haven of Continency for those that will use it well; but there are excellent persons, who have no need of that help, and are able to quench the Fire of Lust by praying, watching, and lying upon the Ground. These I ex∣hort to Virginity, but forbid them not to marry: If they follow not my Advice, I condemn them not; I excommunicate those that commit Adultery and Fornication, but commend those who make an holy use of Matrimony. Marriage is good, that's my Opinion, but Virgini∣ty is better. This I own, and if you will have my Sence, It is as much above Matrimony as Heaven is above the Earth, and makes Men like to Angels.

Afterwards he makes an Objection to himself against Virginity, which seems natural enough: If it be better to live unmarried, why did God institute Marriage? why did he make Women? and should all Men embrace Virginity, how should Mankind be propagated? To answer these Questions, S. Chrysostom goeth back as far as the creation of the first Man, and takes notice, That while he was in the earthly Paradise with Eve, he was taken up with a Conversation with God, that he was then freed from Lust and the desires of the Flesh, and lived in a perfect Virginity, and the whole World was at that time a vast Solitude. But Man having disobey'd God's Commands, and becoming mortal and corruptible, with that happy Life which he enjoyed, he lost also the glory of Virginity; so that Sin being the cause of Death, became at the same time the cause of Marriage. It is probable, that tho' there had been no Marriage, yet the World might have been peopled, and that God had created other Men as he had done the first: adding, That it is not the frequent use of Marriage that multiplieth Mankind, but God's Blessing; and he be∣lieves, that Marriage is more necessary to the World at present, for a remedy against Inconti∣nency, than for the preservation of Mankind; he grants, That it is necessary for the weak, but that Virginity is far more honourable and profitable too. He pretendeth, That whatsoever S. Paul said of Marriage ought to induce Men to embrace Virginity; and at last he describes the troubles and inconveniencies of a married life, and opposes to them the quiet, liberty, sweetness, pleasure, and other advantages of a single one, and then concludes with this noble Sentence;

Here below we are seriously to work out our Salvation; let him that has a Wife live as if he had none; and he that hath not should endeavour with Virginity to get all other Vertues, that so in the next World he may not lament the disorders that he committed whilst he was in this.

This Treatise of Virginity is quoted in the 19th Homily upon the first Epistle to the Corinthians, preached at Antioch. It was by consequence composed in that Town, S. Chrysostom being a Deacon, or newly ordain'd Priest.

The two Treatises against the cohabitation of Clerks and Women, were composed, if Palladius may be believed, at Constantinople, against the abuse of those Churchmen, who lodged devout Women with them, or themselves lodged in the Women's Houses.

Against these Disorders S. Chrysostom wrote two Books, whereof the first reproveth the Vir∣gins that dwelt with Churchmen; and the second admonisheth Churchmen who admitted Women into their Lodgings, and shews, That such mixt-habitation is an occasion of scandal, and cannot be wholly free from sin.

In the Discourse to a young Widow, he both comforts and exhorts her, To continue in her Wi∣dowhood. He made another little Book on purpose to shew, That she ought not to marry again; where he proves, That tho' second marriages be not absolutely forbidden, yet it is much better to continue in Widowhood.

The small Treatise upon this Paradox, That no Man is offended but by himself, was written by S. Chrysostom in his Exile. It is upon a Subject very proper to administer Comfort to a Man in Persecution, for he proveth there by several Examples out of Holy Scripture, That Persecutions and Vexations are so far from doing any harm to those that are tormented wrongfully, that they make them more happy and glorious, and that nothing but Sin can make Men truly mi∣serable.

In the first Exhortation to Theodorus, who is thought to be the Person who afterwards was made Bishop of Mopsuesta; he adviseth him to do Penance for quitting a retired life to return into the World; shewing him, That how great soever his fault might be, yet he might hope for Pardon from God's Mercy, because he always granteth it to those that truly and earnestly repent; which Penance is not to be judged of according to the length of Time, but by the disposition of the Heart, and which consists in a change of life. Afterwards he represents Heaven, Hell and Judgment, whereof he maketh an excellent Description, to oblige him to do Penance, and then

he comforts him, by the hope that his Repentance will recover, not only his former Innocence, but also an higher degree of Holiness and Perfection.

Among the Examples which he mentions to confirm this Truth, he citeth the History of that famous Thief who was converted by S. John, which Eusebius takes cut of Clemens Alexandrinus.

The second Discourse to Theodorus containeth some milder Motives, to oblige him to forsake a Secular life; where he represents the Labours and Cares of the World, to make him out of love with it. This last Exhortation ought to be placed first: These Treatises were written at Antioch.

All S. Chrysostom's Letters were written during his Banishment.

The first is a Circular Letter to Innocent Bishop of Rome, Venerius Bishop of Milan, and Chromatius Bishop of Aquileia, in which, having described the attempts of Theophilus; the In∣juries which he receiv'd from him; the Injustice and Violence exercised towards him; and the Disturbance in the Churches of the East, upon his account, very eloquently, he entreats them to write to the East to tell them, That what was done against him, was to be look'd upon as of no force, as being done against the Laws, in his absence by his Enemies, and to the pre∣judice of those proffers which he had made to appear before lawful Judges; and consequently, that such as acted so Uncanonically were to be punished according to the severity of Ecclesia∣stical Laws; declaring, That he was ready to justifie his Innocence, and to convince his Ac∣cusers of Imposture and Violence before uncorrupt Judges.

There is another Letter to Pope Innocent, wherein he thanks him for the good Offices which he had endeavoured to do him; but it was written long after the former, in the third Year of S. Chrysostom's banishment.

The Letter to the Bishops and Priests that were put in Prison for defending his Innocence, and refusing to communicate with A••sacius, was written in the first Year of his Exile. There he commends the Constancy and Courage of these generous defenders of Justice, whom he scruples not to call Martyrs.

The seventeen following Epistles are directed to the Widow Olympias, who was united to him by the bonds of an intimate Friendship; he comforteth her for the Persecutions she had endured, the Affliction she was in, and for the Sickness she lay under.

These are some of the Maxims which he lays down to comfort her and himself.

No∣thing is to be feared but sin, all other accidents of this life are but a Fable and a Come∣dy; Afflictions, Persecutions, Sicknesses and Death it self should not move us; these are to be born with patience for God's sake, no other Blessing is to be compared with Pati∣ence. We are neither to desire Death, nor to neglect Sickness; not the Persecuted but Persecutors are Objects of pity; and the latter are so much the more to be lamented, be∣cause, like Men in a Frenzie, they feel not their Distemper.

This present life is but a passage, all the Goods of this World are but Dust and Smoak. Such Christian thoughts as these employ'd the Spirit of S. Chrysostom in his Exile, and furnish'd him with matter for the Letters he writ to his Friends: He thanked them likewise in his Epistles, for the care they had of him, and for the generous Methods which they followed to justifie him; with other Letters to oblige his Friends to continue stedfast to him, to let them hear of him, to let them know what they might do for him, and to pray them, That they would write to him. These are the subjects of the greatest part of 225 Letters written to his Friends. Some are concerning the Affairs of the Church in Phoenicia, the Conversion of the Goths, and the helping of the Poor; which shew, That tho' he was banished and deprived of his Bishoprick, yet he preserved an Episcopal Spirit, and Pastoral Watchfulness.

The Judgment which the learned Photius makes of these Letters, is this: (Vol. 36. of his Bibliotheca)

I have read, saith he, the Letters which S. Chrysostom writ to several persons in the time of his Banishment; the most usefull are those seventeen to Olympias, and that to In∣nocent Bishop of Rome; wherein he gives an account of the Persecutions which he suffered, as much as the extent of a Letter could permit. The Stile of these Letters is not very dif∣ferent from that of his other Works, for it is clear and lofty, florid, pleasant and persuading. The Letters to Olympias are not so artless as the others, because he could not suit an Episto∣lary Stile, with the Matter he was to write, which, if we may so say, has done Violence to the Laws of the art of Writing.

This Reflection of Photius is particularly to be apply'd to the Letter directed to Pope In∣nocent, and the other Western Bishops, wherein he describeth the Persecutions which he endur'd with great force of Eloquence. There is not among these Letters That directed to Caesarius the Monk: Peter Martyr was the first that quoted it in these latter times; and since he did not tell whence he took it, and that the words seem'd contrary to the Doctrine of the Church, and of S. Chrysostom upon the Eucharist, those of the Church of Rome did long suspect Peter Martyr as guilty of Imposture, and look'd upon the fragment of that Letter as a piece of his own Inventi∣on. But since that time, Bigotius having found an ancient Manuscript of the Version of that Letter in the Dominican's Library at Florence, it was no longer doubted, but that Peter Martyr took from thence the fragment which he quoted, and I think we ought not to re∣ject it as unworthy of S. Chrysostom: For tho' the Greek Original is not extant entire, yet,

something of S. Chrysostom's Eloquence appears in that Version: and this Letter is mentioned by several Greek Authors q 1.33, who have taken several Quotations that are Printed with the ancient Version.

By this Letter it appears, that Caesarius to whom it was written, admired a certain Book, wherein it was averred, That in Jesus Christ there was such an Union, or mixture of Humanity with Divinity, that they made but one Nature: S. Chrysostom tells him, that this was the Errour of Apollinarius, Arius, Sabellius, and Manichaeus, about the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. And to inform him better, he bids him take notice, that there were two Natures in Christ; and each of them doth preserve its Properties, without mixture, and without confusion, tho' united toge∣ther in the same Person: to explain this truth, he alledges the Example of the Eucharist, and saith, † 1.34 That as Bread is called Bread before the Sanctification, but that after the Divine Grace hath hallowed it by means of the Priest, it ought no longer to be called Bread, but to bear the Name of Christ's Body, tho' it remains in the same nature of Bread, and that Men do not say, that they are two Bodies, but One onely Body of Jesus Christ; so we ought to say, that the Divine Nature being united with the Humane, makes but one Christ, and one Person. And yet it must be acknowledged, that each of these Natures continueth perfect and intire, without mixture, and without confusion; for if there remained but one Nature, how could it be said that there is Union? These words of S. Chrysostom, instead of destroying the real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, do suppose and prove it invincibly: for otherwise how could he affirm, that the Body of Jesus Christ is as truly in the Eucharist, as the Divine Nature is in the Person of Jesus Christ? He saith indeed, that the Bread remains in its own Nature. Which seemeth to be against Transubstantiation: but we may understand by Nature, the consistency and appearance of Bread. In a word, this passage is not har∣der to be understood, than those of Theodoret and of Gelasius, who use the same Comparison: Nay it is much easier, because S. Chrysostom in several places explaineth his Opinion very clearly upon the real Change of the Bread, and Wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.

This Letter ends with an Exposition of his Doctrine, about the Mystery of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, in these words.

It must be Confessed, that the same Jesus Christ who is Mortal, hath two complete Natures, the Divine, and the Humane, and yet he is one and the same only Son, not divisible into two, who comprehends in himself the Properties of both Natures, without any Alteration. They are not two Persons, but the same God, Lord, and Saviour, Word of God, who hath put on our Flesh, but animated Flesh, not Flesh without Soul, as the impious Apollinarius maintains. To this we are to hold; let us avoid those that separate the two Natures, for tho' there are two Natures in Jesus Christ, yet their Union is indisso∣luble and inseparable. We ought to acknowledge that this Union is made in one and the same Person, and Hypostasis of the Son. Neither let us hear those who affirm, That after this Union there is but one Nature in Christ; since they are obliged by their own Hypothesis, to ascribe Sufferings to the Divine Nature, which is impassible.

The Version of this Letter which Bigotius could not get Printed at Paris, for some particular Considerations ‖ 1.35, was Printed after the Latin Copy, by Mr. le Moyne, at the end of the first Volume of his Varia Sacra, at Amster∣dam,

1685. and with the Greek Fragments in the Margin at Rotterdam, by Achers, 1687. This Edition was publickly sold at Paris, which shews, that tho' it was not suffered to be Printed in France, before it was more exactly examined, yet they never design••d to suppress it. And in∣deed the most Skilful Criticks having well considered it, do confess that it was written by an anci∣ent Author, and is not unworthy of S. Chrysostom: and the Learnedest Divines of the Church of Rome agree, that the Doctrine set forth in this Letter, is agreeable to that of this Father, and do not find it a difficult thing to expound that passage concerning the Eucharist.

The Liturgy attributed to S. Chrysostom now Extant, in all probability is not written by him: It is a Liturgy of the Church of Constantinople, made or altered at least since S. Chrysostom, to which his Name was given, because it was for the use of the Church of Constantinople [and to give it more Authority.] We do not find there the Prayers and Ceremonies, which S. Chrysostom mentions in his Homilies, as in use in his time, in the Celebration of the Eucharist; and there were some things which do not suit with the Customs of that Age. The Manuscripts of this Book are very different; in some there are the Names of S. Chrysostom, of Pope Nicholas II. and of the Emperor Alexius Comnenus, who lived long after S. Chrysostom. These passages indeed are not found in that which was translated by Erasmus, but for all that, there is enough to prove that that Liturgy is not of the time of S. Chrysostom.

This Father is one of the most Eloquent Christian Orators, and his Eloquence is the more to be esteemed, because it is without Affectation and Constraint: Fruitfulness of thought, and a∣bundance of Words and Notions is natural to him; tho' he did not tye up himself as S. Gregory Nazianzen, and S. Basil did, to an Attick purity; yet there is a lofty Greatness in his Stile; His Style is pure and pleasant; His Discourse is beautifyed with a wonderful Variety of Conceptions and Figures; He extendeth his Matters, by an infinite Variety of Expressions; He is very ingeni∣ous in finding out Similitudes between things, abundant in Examples and Comparisons; His Eloquence is popular, and very proper for Preaching; His Style is natural, easie and grave; He equally avoideth Negligence, and Affectation; He is neither too plain, nor too florid; He is smooth yet not effeminate; He useth all the Figures that are usual to good Orators very properly, with∣out employing false strokes of Wit, and he never introduces into his Discourses, any Notions of Poets or prophane Authors, neither does he divert his Auditory with Jests; His Composition is Noble, his Expressions Elegant, his Method Just, and his Thoughts Sublime; He speaks like a good Father, and a good Pastor; He often directs his words to the People, and expresses them with a Tenderness and Charity becoming an holy Bishop; He teacheth the principal Truths of Christianity, with wonderful Clearness, and diverts with a marvellous Art, and an agreeable way of ranging his Notions, and persuades by the strength and solidity of his Reasons; His Instru∣ctions are easie; His Descriptions and Relations pleasant; His Inducements so meek and insinuating, that one is pleased to be so persuaded; His Discourses how long soever are not tedious, there are still some new things which keep the Reader awake, and yet he hath no false Beauties, nor useless Figures; His only Aim is to convert his Auditors, or to instruct them in necessary Truths; He neglects all Reflections, that have more subtilty than profit; He never busies himself to resolve hard Questions, nor to give mystical Sences, to make a shew of his Wit, or Eloquence; He searcheth not into Mysteries, neither endeavours to comprehend them; He is contented to propose, after an easie way, palpable and sensible Truths, which none can be ignorant of, without danger of failing of Salvation; He particularly applies himself to moral Heads, and very seldom handleth speculative Truths; He affects not to appear Learned, and never boasts of his Erudition; and yet whatever the Subject be, he speaks with Terms so strong, so proper, and so well chosen, that one may easily perceive he had a profound Knowledge of all sorts of Matters, and particularly of true Divinity.

He proveth the truth of the Christian Religion, by the strongest, the most probable, and sensible * 1.36 Reasons; He urgeth Miracles, Prophecies, and other Proofs of the truth of Religion; but par∣ticularly insists upon the miraculous Establishment of the Church, and in this Argument he tri∣umphs; He shews that it is impossible, that the Doctrine of Jesus Christ could have been re∣ceived, and believed all the world over, notwithstanding the opposition of Secular Powers, the Contradictions of the Wise men in the World, and the endeavours of Devils, had it not been sup∣ported by the power of God himself.

For, says he, there is need of more than humane Ability, to produce such wonderful Effects, both in the Earth, and upon the Sea, and to oblige Men al∣ready prejudiced by extravagant Opinions, and prepossessed with prodigious Malice to such Acti∣ons; yet Jesus Christ delivered all mankind, not only Romans, but Persians also, and all other barbarous Nations from their Calamities: And to bring about these Wonders, he made use of no Arms, and was at no expence; raised no Armies, and fought no Battles; but by eleven Men, who at first were unknown, despicable, ignorant, Ideots, poor, naked, and without Arms; He per∣suaded different Nations, and made them embrace an high Philosophy, not only relating to the Government of this present Life, but also to things to come, and Eternity self; His po∣wer over all minkind was such, as that it made them abolish the Laws of their Fathers, re∣nounce their ancient Customs, and follow new ones; He spoiled them even of the love of those things they were most fond of to fasten their Affections, upon such things as are most dif∣ficult and painful.

But the Promulgation of the Gospel, and the setling of the Church, are not the only Proofs of the truth of our Religion, the Stedfastness and perpetuity of the

Church is also in S. * 1.37 Chrysostom's Opinion an invincible Argument of it.

For he addeth, that it is not only a thing worthy of Admiration, that Jesus Christ should settle his Church over all the Earth, but also that he should render it invincible against so great numbers of Enemies as assaulted it on every side. The Gates of Hell that cannot prevail against it, are the Dangers which seem to hurry it to the very Gates of Hell. Doe you not perceive the truth of that prediction of Jesus Christ.... Tho' Tyrants took up Arms against it, tho' Soldiers conspired her Destruction, tho' the People raged furiously, tho' a contrary Custom opposed it self, tho' Preachers, Philosophers, Magistrates, and rich Men stood up to destroy it; The Divine word breaking with greater force than fire it self, consumed these Thorns, cleansed these Fields, and disseminated the Seed of preaching over the whole Earth. And though such as believed the Gospel were shut up in Prisons, sent into Banishment, spoiled of their Goods, thrown into the Fire, cast into the Sea, and exposed to all manner of Torments, Reproaches, and Persecu∣tions, and tho' they were treated every where, as publick Enemies; yet they multiplyed daily; their being persecuted increased their Zeal..... Those Rivers of Blood caused by the Massa∣cres of the Faithful, before their Eyes excited their Piety, and the Pains they endured inflamed their Zeal.

This same Saint observes in another place, that Christians are never so disorderly in their Beha∣viour, * 1.38 and so cold in their Devotion, as when he that sits on the Throne is of their Religion.

Which, saith he, justifies that this Religion is not established by the Powers of the World, and is not upheld and preserved by Earthly force.

S. Chrysostom's way of dealing with Hereticks is not less rational, than that which he useth towards Heathens and Jews. He expoundeth the Mysteries very plainly, and proveth them by Testimonies of Holy Scripture, and the Authority of the Church, not pretending to penetrate, or give the Reasons of them, and to answer those Difficulties, which have no other Foundation but humane Reasonings. He confesses, that he does not understand the Reasons of what he believes. * 1.39

I know, saith he, that God is every where, and entire in every part of the World, but I know not how this can be. I doubt not, but that God is without beginning, but I conceive not how that is, for humane Reason cannot comprehend a thing that hath no beginning. I know that the Son is begotten of God the Father, but I cannot imagine how that was done.

He believes that the Divine Nature is so high and unsearchable, that it is not possible to comprehend it; and pursues this Reasoning so far, that he sticketh not to say, that Seraphims and Angels them∣selves do not see the Substance of God, but only an Emanation of his Divine Light. This pas∣sage * 1.40 hath made some modern Greeks suppose, that the Saints do not see the Substance of God, but only a Corporeal Light, such as (they say) appeared upon Mount Tabor. This also hath exer∣cised the Subtilty of our Divines, who constitute Happiness in the Vision of the Substance of God: And yet S. Chrysostom hath respect in this passage, neither to that Light of the Modern Greeks, not to the Disputes of the Schoolmen; his only design is to shew against Aetius, that the Di∣vine Nature is not to be comprehended, and that evident Reasons of the Mysteries are not to be given.

It is not necessary to inlarge upon the Opinions of S. Chrysostom, concerning the Mystery of the Trinity; it is certain, that he maintained the Faith of the Council of Nice, and that he proved the Divinity both of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; yet it ought to be observed, that he was of Meletius's opinion, concerning the Signification of the word Hypostasis, and that he owned Three Hypostases, and one Nature in God.

As to the Mystery of the Incarnation, tho' he was equally contrary to the Er∣rour * 1.41 of those who distinguished two Persons in Christ, and that of those who con∣founded the two Natures, and their Properties; yet he in several passages of his Writings, declared against the latter Opinion very eagerly.

In his Panegyricks of the Saints, he ascribeth to them all manner of Felicity; * 1.42 he places them in Heaven, in the same Rank with Angels, and Archangels, of Prophets, and Martyrs; and yet in other places, he seems to affirm, that their Happiness is referred to the Day of Judgment; but these may agree well enough, if we say, that he spake in the latter of a perfect and consummated Happiness.

Angels, if we believe S. Chrysostom, are so called, because they declare the Will of God unto Men; for which cause the Scripture representeth them with Wings: * 1.43 They take care of Men, are present at Divine Services, and every Christian hath his Guardian Angel.

The Devil is not wicked of his own Nature, but is become such by Sin. God permits him to tempt Men for their good. It is a Childish thing to believe, that * 1.44 those are Angels which the Scripture calleth the Children of God in Genesis, and of whom it is said, that they conversed with the Daughters of Men; since they are of a spiritual and incorporeal Nature.

He Confesses in several places, that the Fall of the first Men was prejudicial to the whole Race, which ever since is become subject to Pains, Sicknesses, and Death, from which it was free before Sin: He acknowledgeth, that an inclination to Evil, and Lusts, are Consequences of the first Man's sin: but he seemeth not to have owned Original sin, after the same manner that S. Austin doth; at least it cannot be denied, that he hath given another Sence to those places of S. Paul

which seem to prove it most. As for Example, when he expoundeth that famous passage, Rom. 5. 12. By One man sin entred into the World, &c. He understandeth of Death what S. Paul saith of Sin, because it is the Wages of Sin; and upon those other words of the same Chapter, As by the disobedience of one, many are become Guilty, &c. This Sentence, saith he, seems to have much of Difficulty: for how can it be, that one only Man having sinned, many should be made guilty by his sin? We may easily conceive, that the first Man being become mortal, it was necessary, that his Off-spring should be mortal likewise; but what Likelihood, and what Reason is there, that a man should be a Sinner, because of anothers disobedience?... What then signifyeth the word Sin∣ner? In my Opinion it signifyeth nothing else, but a condemned Man, subject to Pain and Death: This is a way of speaking which does not agree with S. Augustin's Doctrine: Tho' it is not hard to defend S. Chrysostom, by saying, That tho' he spake thus, yet he admitted all that Divines own concerning Original sin: For what is Original sin, according to them? It is either a Privation of Original righteousness, or Lust with the guilt of Sin, or pain and Guilt together. But S. Chry∣sostom acknowledges all these: for in the first place he Confesseth, that by the first Man's sin, all men were deprived and spoiled of the State of Innocence, that they are become not only mor∣tal, and subject to Pain and Grief, but also inclined to Evil. Thus, in his Opinion, Lust is an effect of the first Man's sin: and that Concupiscence in men, makes them unworthy of eternal Life, if the Grace of Jesus Christ saveth them not by Baptism.

He ascribes much to the strength of Free-will; He always speaks as if he believed that it de∣pends upon our selves to do good or evil, and affirms that God always gives his Grace to those * 1.45 who on their side doe all they can; That we must begin, and God makes an end; That he follow∣eth the motions of our Wills, and giveth them their Perfection; yet he owns the necessity of Grace to do good, but submits it still to our Will: So that according to him, We are to will and chuse the good, and God gives us the necessary Grace to fulfil the same; he prevents not our Will, that our Liberty may not be prejudiced; he worketh good in us, but that is when we are willing: when our Will is determined, he draweth to himself, but only those who do all their endeavours to come near to him. Those Principles about foreknowledge, and Predestination, agree very well with these Conclusions. God did not predestinate men, but as he foresaw their merits: foreknowledge is not the cause of the event of things, but God foresaw them because they shall happen. He calls all men; Jesus Christ died for all men; he prepared his Grace for all, he predestinated those whom he foresaw would use his Grace well: He Confesses, that no man is free from sin in this Life, nay he excepteth not the holy Virgin Mary.

S. Chrysostom attributes much vertue and efficacy to Sacraments, but he requires very holy is∣positions, * 1.46 that Men may be the better for them.

He saith, That Circumcision and the other Sacraments of the Jews, did not blot out Sins, but cleansed only Bodily filthynesses; whereas our Baptism hath far greater Vertue purifying the Soul, delivering it from sin, and filling it with the Grace of the Holy Spirit: that John's Baptism was indeed more excellent, than that of the Jews, but much inferior to ours, because it conferred neither the Holy Ghost, nor the remission of Sins, but only exhorted Men to Repentance. The Baptism of Jesus Christ, not * 1.47 only frees the Soul from sin, but also sanctifyeth it, wherefore it is called the Laver of Regenera∣tion, because it reneweth the Soul through Grace.

Yet he does not believe, that Baptism pro∣duces these Effects in those of riper years, unless they are well disposed to receive it.

He exacts from those that come to this Sacrament, that they be watchful in the things of their Salvation, * 1.48 disingaged from worldly Cares, and that they renounce all disorderly Conversation: that they be zealous in their Devotion, and banish from their Hearts all thoughts unbecoming so holy an Action, and keep their Souls prepared for the coming of this great King.

And because the Clinicks, (that is such as receive Baptism at the point of Death) have not time thus to prepare themselves, he doubts of their Salvation. He speaketh of their Condition in such terms, as describe the Case of a dying man very naturally, who deferred to repent of his Sins till the hour of Death, and then would receive the Sacraments.

Altho', saith he, Sacraments con∣tain the same Graces, when the Preparation is different, yet all may not receive them. They receive Baptism laying upon their Beds, you receive it in the bosom of the Church, which is the Mother of all the Faithful; they receive it weeping, and you with joy; they with groans, and you with thanksgiving; they in the heat of a Fever, and you under the Sense of the heavenly Grace: every thing here hath a Relation to the Grace received, there every thing disagrees with it; there are sighings and tears, while the Sacrament is adminstred, Children cry, the Wife tears her Hair, Friends are dejected, Servants weep, the whole House is in Mourning; and if you mind the Spirit of the sick Person, you shall find it more full of Sorrow, than that of the Standers by; for as a stormy Sea divides into several Waves, so his Soul being agi∣tated with troubles is torn with a thousand Disquiets, racked with infinite Troubles. … In this torture comes in a Priest, whose Presence is more dreadful both to the Company, and to the sick Man, than the Sickness it self: his Visit ordinarily causeth greater Despair, than the Physicians Sentence, that there is no hope of Recovery. They imagine that Sacraments, tho'

instruments of the Spiritual life, are infallible tokens of Corporal death. But this is not yet the end of his Misery, nor the height of his Affliction; sometimes while Necessaries for the Sacrament are preparing, the Soul departs out of the Body; and often, tho' remaining in the Body, yet it receives not the fruit of the Sacrament; for when the Sick person knows no body, hears not the Prayers, and cannot utter the Words whereby he is to engage with God, when he is half dead; what benefit can he reap from the Sacrament?

S. Chrysostom doth not discourse oftner, nor in higher terms of any one Mystery, than of * 1.49 the Eucharist. He says in many places, that the Body and Blood of Christ are upon the Al∣tars: That Jesus Christ hath left us his Body and Blood: That the Bread and Wine become the Body and Blood of Christ: That we ought not to doubt of it, seeing Christ himself af∣firmeth it: That it is a surprizing Miracle, comparable to the greatest Wonders: That by vertue of Christ's Words, in the Celebration of this Mystery, Christ is offered in Sacrifice: That Jesus Christ offereth himself to God the Father: That this Sacrifice is made without shedding of blood: That Angels and Arch-angels are present at it: That fire from Heaven consumeth the things offered, and changeth them into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ: That this Table is to be approached unto with reverence and trembling: That there is need of Holi∣ness, to receive holy things: That Penitents ought not to come near; and that these Myste∣ries must be hid from Catechumens: That Men ought not only to be freed from Sin, but also from Earthly affections, and penetrated with divine Love, transported with an holy Zeal, and possessed with fervent Charity. Three sorts of Prayers were made at the Celebration: The First for those that were possessed; the Second for Penitents; and the Third for the Faithfull. There was mention made of the Dead, and Invocation of Saints; The Sanctus was recited; The Catechumens and Penitents were put out; The Energumenes were brought in at the Consecration, and Prayers were made for them.

S. Chrysostom wisht that all those who were present might communicate; and sticks not to say, That all those that are unworthy to communicate, are not worthy to partake of the * 1.50 Prayers: And that as he who finds not himself guilty of any Sin, ought to communicate every day; so he, on the contrary, that hath committed Sin, and repented not, should not doe it, even upon Festival-days.

The Sacrament was administred to dying persons, and it was preserved in a Box. * 1.51

Lastly, That none but the Priests alone have the power to administer the Eucharist, which is the great thing that exalteth their Dignity. * 1.52

But there is another Power invested in them which is not inferior to the other, which is that of binding and loosing, of retaining and remitting of Sins. It were to be wished that Men needed no Repentance, but that they might keep their Baptismal purity without spot: * 1.53 But it being impossible not to Sin, God hath prepared the remedy of Repentance. Those that are guilty of high Crimes, as Murther, Adultery, or Fornication, and the like, are put out of the Church and enjoyned publick Penance; but if they mend their faults, they may come in again, having purified themselves by Repentance. As many as continue in Sin, and yet will come into the Church, notwithstanding the Admonitions of Christ's Ministers, aggravate their crime. Men may hope for pardon, whatsoever their Sin be; but let them have a care of be∣ing too confident: Few days are enough to get pardon for Sin. * 1.54

God, saith he, in the Ninth Homily of Repentance, doth not consider the length, but the zeal of Penance. If you have sinned several times, repent; come into the Church and put away your Sins. As you use to rise up as often as you fall, so as often as you have sinned repent of your Sin, and never despair. If you sin a second time, repent again; and beware lest ye fall into that consternation, which may make you lose the hope of future benefits. Tho' ye should sin in the last day of your life, yet enter into the Church by repentance; this is the time of Re∣medy, and not of Judgment: God requireth not the penalty of Sin, but grants pardon for it. He wisely addeth in the following Homily, That none ought to despair, but every one ought to beware of presumption; for these two extreams are equally dangerous, because Despair hinders Men from rising again, and Presumption makes those fall that stood upright before: Sloth causes us to come short of Heaven, and Despair precipitates into an Abyss of Malice.

And thus S. Chrysostom observes a just Medium between the exceeding Severity of some who thrust Men into despair, and the soft Compliance of others, who promise Remission without a true and sincere Repentance. Whosoever hath committed Sin, must own and confess it before * 1.55 God, if he would obtain pardon: He must be truly affected with a sensible grief for his wick∣edness; he must truly return to the Lord, and be converted; abhorr his iniquity, forsake his vi∣cious

habits, after his course of life, and love God with all his heart, and above all things, and doe every thing for his sake, &c.

The onely thing that may seem difficult in S. Chrysostom's Discourses concerning Penance, is what he saith of Confession of Sins: For in several places he seems to affirm, That it is not necessary to confess to Men, but that it is sufficient to confess to God, who knoweth the secrets * 1.56 of the heart. Those passages are remarkable, and have often been alledged by the Enemies of Confession. It has been answered by some, That S. Chrysostom spoke onely in opposition to a publick Confession, supposed to have been abolished by Nectarius; but these Men doe not observe, that most of these passages, even the most express, are taken out of the Homilies preached at Antioch by S. Chrysostom. The best, and the most natural Answer is, That S. Chry∣sostom does not speak in those places of those enormous Crimes that are subject to Canonical Penance; but in general of such light offences as Christians daily commit; for the remission whereof, they need neither Confession nor Absolution, but only true Motions of inward re∣pentance. He likewise discourseth of that sort of Sins, when he saith, That they are forgiven by Tears, by Alms, by Humility, by Prayer, and other remedies of that nature. However, S. Chrysostom was very severe in the punishment of Sinners; and he not only wisht that no∣torious Sinners might be put out of the Church, and enjoyned Penance, as Adulterers and Blasphemers; but he threatned also to excommunicate those who came to the holy Mysteries negligently, and such as lived in hatred and quarrels, that minded Stage-plays, were envious, proud, &c. Neither would he have great Lords to be spared; * 1.57 For, saith he, as to Ecclesiastical Correction, Princes are but as other Faithfull, there ought to be no distinction. He adds, That the Ministers of Jesus Christ should doe their Duty, tho' there were no hope that their reproof could prevail: Yet he would not have the Sword of the Church used lightly, or that Anathe∣ma's should be indiscreetly pronounced. This is the subject of the discourse concerning Ana∣thema's; wherein he endeavours to refute those, who without lawfull authority, undertook bold∣ly to condemn their Brethren, and to pronounce Anathema's upon such matters as they were ignorant of. And he observes, that Men ought to be extreamly reserved in this case, and not to publish Anathema's inconsiderately against any: But when there is necessity, it ought to be done with an intention to cure, and not to destroy those that are under that penalty. † 1.58 He saith further, in another place, That Zeal must be temper'd with Mercy, for otherwise it dege∣nerates into Fury, and other Men's faults are not hardly to be judged of.

In S. Chrysostom's time Martyrs were had in honour; they were commemorated in the pub∣lick * 1.59 Services; their Festivals were kept, and their Relicks reverenc'd; not that they believed there was any vertue in those Bones, but because the sight of their Graves, Urns, or Bones, af∣fected and awakned the Mind, after the same manner, as if the Dead were present, and prayed with us; because the sight of their precious Relicks made an impression upon the Mind. They visited the holy Places with Devotion; but S. Chrysostom observes, that the chief intention of those Pilgrimages ought to be the assisting of the Poor. The Dead were pray'd for: and S. Chrysostom exhorts their Relations to give Alms in their behalf.

Sundays and great Festivals were kept with great Solemnity. S. Chrysostom exhorteth Chri∣stians * 1.60 to spend that day in Exercises of Devotion: He zealously reproveth all those who employ that day about Businesses or Recreations; affirming, That God's Curse will light upon their Labours, and dissipate what they get by neglecting his Service. In several places he encoura∣geth * 1.61 the Faithfull to frequent Divine Service and the Publick Prayers of the Church, and shews that they are more powerfull and of greater efficacy, than private ones: He reproves those that gave attention to Sermons, but would go out as soon as the Sermon was ended.

When I preach, (says he, in the Third Discourse of the incomprehensible Nature of God) I * 1.62 that am Christ's Servant as you are, you come in throngs to hear me; you hearken to my words, and exhort one another, and attend with patience unto the end; but when Jesus Christ appeareth in the Mysteries, the Church is empty; you go out as soon as you have heard the Sermon, which is a sign that you have profited nothing; for had the Truths preached unto you made any impression upon your Minds, you would have stay'd in the Church, and have partaken of these stupendious Mysteries with reverence and devotion; but, alas! you depart immediately after the Sermon, as if you came only to hear a Consort of Musick. Some, to excuse themselves, use this weak reason; We can pray at home, but can hear no Sermons but at Church: You deceive your selves; for tho' ye may pray at home, yet your Prayer cannot have the efficacy of that in the Church, where so many Priests join their Pray∣ers with yours, and where a common Voice crieth to Heaven to implore God's mercy. Common Prayer is a wonderfull Consort, proceeding from a Concord of Charity: To which we are to add the Prayers of the Priests, who are set over the Assemblies; that the Prayers of the People, tho' weaker of themselves, may gather strength by being joined to those of God's Ministers.

The Fast of Lent was exactly observed, with Abstinence from Meats; but for any Bodily Infirmity it might be dispensed with. Two days of the week were exempt from Fasting, that the Body might have some Respite.

S. Chrysostom looks upon the Holy Scripture, As the ground and Rule of all the truths of Reli∣gion; He exhorts all the Faithful to read it exactly: and this Advice he presses an infinite * 1.63 number of times; He expounds it Litterally, and draws from it edifying moral Instructions, but he never proposes any forced Allegories, nor resolveth those Questions that have more of Curiosity than Profit, as most Writers of Commentaries, whether Ancient or Modern ve∣ry frequently do: I should never make an end, if I should Collect all the common places of S. Chrysostom upon moral Subjects: I shall only mention two or three of the most considera∣ble upon every Subject, and point at some others.

Opinions of S. Chrysostom upon several moral Principles. Of the Love of God.

MOST Men have taken up a false Notion of the Love of God, looking upon it as an Act of the mind, which thinks it has a Love for God, and expresses it with words. S. Chrysostom to undeceive them of this Error, proves by a comparison with the love men have for the Creature, that the love which they ought to have for God, is a strong cleaving of the Heart to God, which is the Rule, Principle, and Motive of all their Actions, and which begets in them a contempt of all that is not God.

If those (saith he in his Comment upon Psalm 91.) that are in love with Corporeal Beauties, have no Sense for all other things in the World, and follow no business, but that of beholding continually an Object which is so dear and so acceptable to them; Can a man that loveth God, as God ought to be loved, have any Sense afterwards of the good and evil, of the Pleasures and Afflictions of this Life? No truly, for he is above all these things, and his delight is only in good things that are Immortal, and of the same Nature with him whom he loveth; those that love the Creatures do quickly change, 'tho unwillingly, their Affection, for Oblivion; because the things which they love decay and corrupt; but this spiritual love hath neither end nor bounds, but contains in it self more Pleasure and Profit than any thing else, and nothing is able to extinguish it.

He compareth the love that we ought to have for God, with that which covetou sMen have for riches? in the Sixth Homily upon the Second Epistle to Timothy.

It is a shameful thing, saith he, that Men possessed with a violent Passion for riches, should shew nothing of that love which they ought to have for God; and that, we have less Consideration for God, than covetous Men have for wealth. For to get Money they watch much, undertake long Journeys, expose themselves to Dangers, Hatred and Ambushes, and undergo all Extremities, but we refuse to bear with the least word for God, or to expose our selves to the least hatred for his Service, &c.

In the Third Homily upon 1 Cor. he tells Christians, That they love Jesus Christ less than their Friends.

Many, saith he, have endured the loss of their Goods, for the Service of their Friends; but none are willing, I will not say, to be deprived of their Goods for Jesus Christ, but even to be reduced to mere Necessaries for his sake, or to content them∣selves with what they have at present. We often bear with Affronts, and make our selves Enemies for our Friends; but none will incurr the Hatred of any for the Service of Jesus Christ, and both this Hatred and Love are looked upon as unprofitable things; we never despise a Friend when we see him hungry, but would not give a Morsel of bread to Jesus Christ who cometh to us daily..... if our Friend be sick we visit him immediately; but tho' Christ is often detained in Prison in the Persons of his Members, we come not at him. When a Friend is going a Journey we melt into tears, but tho' Christ daily departeth from us, or rather we daily put him away by our sins, yet we are not affected with Grief upon that Account.

Last of all, S. Chrysostom observeth Hom. 52. upon the Acts, That,

Whosoever loveth God truly, will despise all the things of this World, even those that are the most precious and il∣lustrious. Glory and Shame are indifferent things to him; he is no more Sollicitous than if he were left alone in the World: He despiseth Temptations, Scourgings, Dungeons, with as much Courage, as if all these were endured by another, or as if his Body were a Dia∣mond; he laughs at the Pleasures of this Life, and is not in the least susceptible of Passions.

See the Twentieth Homily upon S. Matthew, where he shews that God is to be loved not in Words but in Deeds. Hom. 30. upon 2 Cor. Hom. 3. upon 1 Tim. Hom. 52. upon the Acts.

Of the Love of our Neighbour.

CHarity (saith S. Chrysostom in the Sixth Homily upon the Epistle to Titus) is the greatest of all Vertues, it brings the Lovers thereof to the very Throne of God. Virginity, Fasting, and Austerities profit only those that practise them, but Alms-deeds reach to all, and embrace all the Members of Jesus Christ: Now there is no Vertue greater than that which reunites scattered and separated parts. Charity is the Badge of Christian Religion, whereby the Disciples of Jesus Christ are known: That is it which cures our Crimes, cleanses the spots of our Souls, it is as a Ladder to ascend into Heaven, and it joyns all the parts of Christ's Body together.

See the Sixtieth Homily upon S. Matthew, the 15th. and 78th. upon S. John, the 40th. up∣on the Acts, the 8th. upon the Rom. the 32d. upon 2 Cor. the 9th. upon Ephes. the Second upon the last to Tim. the 33d. upon 1 Cor. the 4th. upon Thes. the 10th. upon the Epistle to the Ephes. the Second upon the Epistle to the Philippians.

Of Alms-deeds.

THE first effect of Charity is to give Alms, and the Obligation to Alms-deeds, is inclu∣ded in the Commandment of Loving our Neighbours as our selves. S. Chrysostom re∣commends this Vertue in so many places, that he saith himself in the 89th. Homily upon S. Matthew, That they upbraided him with speaking of nothing else.

Giving of Alms (saith he in several places) renders Men like unto God, cleanseth from sin, and appeaseth the Anger of God. To give to the Poor, is to give unto God, it is to lend to him upon Use. We are not only advised, but commanded to give Alms. Men are not Masters but only Stewards of their Goods. God who is the Soveraign Lord hath entrusted them with the rich, that they might relieve the poor. All other good works are unprofitable with∣out Alms-deeds. Alms should be given with Joy, and in abundance. Men ought not to stay till Death to dispose of their Charity; but if they have done nothing in their Life-time, it is good to leave to the poor after Death, and give them as much as to a Child, or at least as to a Servant.

These Principles and Maxims S. Chrysostom repeateth often in his Homilies, as the Thirtieth Homily upon Genesis, that upon Psalm 101. the Second Ser∣mon concerning Lazarus, the Seventeenth Homily upon 2 Cor. the Sixth upon Titus, The 5th. 35th, 45th, 47th, 48th, 52d. 66th. 78th, 80th, 86th, upon S. Matth. The 23d, 25th, 27th, 40th, 76th, upon S. John, the Seventh upon Colos. the 11th, 15th, 18th, upon Rom. the 20th, 21st, and 43d, upon 1 Cor. the 5th, Homily of Penance, the Sermon upon the Petition of the Sons of Zebedee, the first Homily of Fasting, and in an infinite number of places besides.

Of Riches and Poverty.

AS the Luxury of Riches hinders Men from giving of Alms, so we ought not to wonder that S. Chrysostom preaching upon Charity, declaims vehemently against Riches, and speaks in Commendation of Poverty.

Riches (saith he in the Second Homily of Statues) are not forbidden, if a good use be made of them. But what Probability is there that Men should not neglect Jesus Christ who is naked, while they build marble Palaces for themselves? O wretched Man! to what purpose is the Magnificency of thy House? This Palace will not, but thy good works will follow thee..... To day rich, and to morrow poor. I must confess, that I cannot forbear smiling when I read in Wills and Testaments, I give and bequeath to such a one, the Revenue of my Estate for Life, and to such a one the Fee∣simple. To speak Properly, we have but the use of things, the Propriety belongs not to us, and tho' we should possess them all our Life-time, yet will they leave us when we die.... Poverty is a singular advantage to those that know how to use it well. It is a Treasure that cannot be taken away, a support that cannot fail, and a Sanctuary that cannot be violated. If you ask the Admirers of that foolish Magnificence, what is the Object of their Admiration? They will answer you, that it is either the brave Horse that carrieth this new Croe∣sus, or his rich Livery, his gilded Clothes, or the delicate Meats that are set before him, or the Pleasures he enjoyeth. This is what is admired, and what cannot be too much deplored; and yet none of these Commendations are directed to this rich Man, they all belong to his Horse, his Clothes or his Equipage, they admire how well he is mounted, they praise his Men, his Clothes, but they say nothing of his Person. Can there be a greater Folly? But on the other side, if you see a poor Man in want, and under contempt, despised by those that see him, make

much of him, and by your esteem of him, the Beholders will be excited to Vertue. They will tell you, that he is an indigent Fellow, a Wretch; but do you say on the contrary that he is a happy Man, because he hath God for his Friend, because he hath not fastned his Heart to perish∣ing Riches, nor defiled his Conscience. With such Christian Discourses as these instruct your Bre∣thren; let both your Praises and your Contempts have no other Aim than the Glory of the Almighty.... One may commend, reprove, and be angry for God's sake. If you find a Servant, a Friend, a Neighbour, robbing, or committing Lewdness; If you hear one telling a Lye, or Blaspheming; If you perceive that your Neighbour is going to prostitute his Soul at a Play, call him back, check, and correct that Sinner: These good works will be done to the Honour of God. If this Servant, or this Friend hath offended you, and is departed from his Duty, for∣give him, that will be Forgivness for God's sake; make also Friends and Enemies to your selves for God's cause. Do you ask how? thus it is: Never contract that sort of Friendship which is gotten by Luxury, Interest or Ambition, but seek to make you such Friends, as may advise you to Moderation under a great Fortune, and Comfort you in Adversity, who may prompt you only to Honesty, and who by their Counsels and Prayers may unite you to Jesus Christ. If you see a lewd Person, one full of dangerous Opinions, break off all commerce with him.... If you speak in any Company, let your words be Godward. He did so often Dis∣course against Riches, and the abuse of them, that he saith himself, in the Sermon against Eu∣tropius, upon Psalm 44 that they accused him of hating rich Men. But, saith he, why should I not speak continually against them, since they cease not to torment the Poor? I complain not of them because they are rich, but because they use their Riches ill: for I make this Pro∣fession, Never to blame any Body for being wealthy, but for with-holding what is not his own.... The present Life (addeth he) is a Pilgrimage; let no man say, I have a Town, a House, an Estate, &c. No Man hath any thing here below: all the good things of this Life, are the Instruments of our Journey; we are travelling as long as this Life lasteth. Some gather wealth in this Journey, and bury Gold in the way, and pray tell me, when you are come into an Inn, do you furnish it with superfluous Houshold-stuff? No certainly, you are contented to eat and drink there, and to be gone as soon as you can. This Life is an Inn, we are scarce come into it, but we are obliged to quit it, therefore let us do it readily; let us keep nothing here, that we may lose nothing in the next Life. You are Travellers in this Life, and less than Travellers; for a Traveller knoweth, when he cometh into his Inn, and when he goeth out, &c. In this dreadful Ignorance I lose a great deal of time; and while I am laying up of Provisions, God calls me, and upbraids me thus, Thou Fool! whose shall these things be which thou hast prepared? for this very Night thy Soul shall be demanded of thee.... But what, will some Persons say, must be done in this Case? even this, Hate temporal Goods, love eter∣nal Life, part with your Estate, I do not say with all, but with what is superfluous; do not covet what is another's; spoyl not the Widow, nor rob the Orphan; ravish not the Goods of this World, but take Heaven by violence; Jesus Christ approves of this violence, &c. Do not vex the Poor, but doe him Right, &c.

See Hom. 4. upon S. Matthew, where he proves by the Example of the Three Children, that were cast into the Fiery Furnace, that Riches are not to be worshipped: The 9th. Homily up∣on S. Matthew, where he shews, that we ought not to be lifted up, because of Riches: The 20th, and 64th, against the desire of wealth: The 42d. against Luxury and Pleasures: The 48th. against excess in Clothes: The 80th. and 81st. Homilies against Covetousness: The 88th. against the Luxury of Women: And, the 19th. Homily upon S. John, concerning the use that ought to be made of Riches.

Of Forgiving, and against Revenge.

THE Second effect of Charity towards our Neighbour, is forgiving of our Enemies, in opposi∣tion to a Spirit of Revenge, of Enmity and Resentment. S. Chrysostom declaims severely against this Vice, in an Homily purposely composed on that Subject, which is the Twenty-second, concerning Statues. These are some of his Notions.

The revengefull Man, saith he, is not less unworthy of the Communion, than the Blasphemer and Adulterer. The lewd Person puts an end to his Crime when he has satisfied his impure Desire; but he that keeps up an obstinate Hatred, sins continually, and never makes an end. The fire of Lust is spent by enjoyment; but that of Hatred feeds it self, and is renewed every moment. With what face then can we implore the Mercy of God, whilst we are full of bitter hatred against our Brethren? Your Bro∣ther hath done you an injury; but doe you not often commit injuries against God? Doe you compare the Servant with his Master? In the mean time, he that wrongeth you, was perhaps wrong'd by you before: But what wrong hath God ever done you? or rather what benefits hath he not taken pleasure to bestow upon you, and you in requital return only injuries to him again? In a word; pretending to be revenged of others, you punish your selves: The hatred you harbour, is your own tormenter, to tear your own bowels. Is there any thing more un∣happy than he who meditates revenge? He is a Mad-man that never enjoyeth any rest, his

Heart being filled with Storms and Troubles: He abhorreth all the Actions, the Words, and the very Name of his Enemy. And to what end is this Fury, and these Torments? We ought to forgive our Enemies to prevent the pains we feel by hating them. What folly is it to seek revenge at our own cost; to doe our selves a great mischief, that another may receive a lesser, &c.

See the 61st. Homily upon S. Matthew; the 39th. upon S. John; the 38th. upon the Acts; an Homily upon the Epistle to the Thessalonians, and several other places.

Of Fasting.

NExt to giving of Alms, Fasting is one of the most powerfull means to obtain pardon for Sin; but that Fasting may be profitable, it must be accompanied with a regular life. This S. Chrysostom takes notice of almost every-where, when he discourses of Fasting. See how he ex∣presseth himself, in the Second Homily of Statues.

I doe not call Fasting a meer abstinence from Meats, but forbearance from Sin: For Fasting is not able of its own nature to blot out the pollution of our offences, except necessary dispositions doe attend it.... Let us therefore have a care, that in Fasting, we fall not short of the price and reward that belongs to it: But let us learn perfectly to practise it holily. Afterwards he sets forth the qualities of a Fast by the example of that of the Ninevites.... He (saith our Author) offers an injury to Fasting, who defines it to be an abstinence from Meats. You Fast, Brother; but shew me your Fasting by your Works: but you will ask me, what Works? I require therefore, that when you see a poor Man, you be sure to help him in his misery; that you reconcile your self to your enemy; that another Man's Glory may not excite your Envy; and that you shut your Eyes when you meet an handsome Woman: For Fasting respects not the Mouth barely, but the Ear, the Hands, the Feet, and all the other Parts of the Body. Covetous Hands should fast, and touch no more other Men's goods; the Feet should fast, and run no more to profane Shews; and the Eyes should fast, by turning aside from that beauty, whose sight is so dangerous.

In the Fourth Homily of Statues, he lays down the same Maxims again.

We see, saith he, nothing but People making merry, and saying one to another; Victory, all is our own, Mid-lent is over. My advice to these is, That they should consider, whether the inward Man is in a better condition than it was when the Fast begun: For then indeed we have reason to re∣joyce, when our Fasting does not end with those Vices that it began with, and when we are come to the Festival of Easter with a Conscience purified by Fasting. I know some who, in the middle of Lent, do dread already that of the next year.... Can there be a greater weakness? But whence cometh it? Even from this, That we make Fasting to consist only in forbearing of Meats, and not in the reforming of our Manners.

There may be (saith he in the 22d. Homily) several reasons not to Fast; but there is none not to correct a vicious habit. You have broken your Fast, because of a bodily infirmity. Well: But why doe you not forgive your Enemy? Is there any corporal indisposition that hinders? Lastly, He observeth in the 7th. and 11th. Homilies upon Genesis, that the true Fast is absti∣nence from Sin; for forbearance of Meat was introduced to restrain the motions of the Flesh, and to suppress the Passions.

See the Homilies of Fasting and of Alms-deeds, and the 57th. upon S. Matthew.

Upon this; That Man is obliged to doe all for God, and to direct all his Actions to him alone.

COncerning a Christian's Duty, S. Chrysostom discourseth thus in the 23d. Homily, against those that kept the Feasts of the New Moons.

S. Paul (saith he) commands us to doe all things to the Glory of God: For whether you eat, or whether you drink, or whatsoever ye doe, doe all to the Glory of God. You will ask what relation have these things to the Glory of God? In∣vite a poor Man to your Table; this is called to eat and drink to the Glory of God. You may also work for God by shutting up your selves in your own Houses: How, and by what means, will you say? When you hear the Disorders and Insolencies committed in the Streets, by lewd Men, then shut your doors, have nothing to doe with that hellish Crew, and you shall keep your Houses for the Glory of God. You may also glorifie the Lord both by your Praises and by your Contempt: As for example; When you see a wicked Man gorgeously apparell'd, and sumptuously adorned with the spoil of the Countries, which he hath brought to desolation, and attended with a great number of Servants; and some weak Soul is blinded with that vain lustre, discover to him his errour, and make him see the vanity of that insignificant Pomp, and pity the happiness of that unhappy Man. Thus may Men despise things for the Glory of God. This contempt is an instruction for those that are witnesses thereof. We prove God to be pre∣sent at all the actions of our lives, even in our purchases and sales, when we are contented with

an honest gain, and when we take no advantage of other Men's necessities to advance the rates of our Commodities.

In your Fasts and Prayers, in your Contempt and Praise, in your Silence and Discourses, in Selling and Buying, think always on the Glory of God.

See upon the same Subject the 6th. Homily upon S. Matthew, the 79th. upon the same, the 9th. and 14th. upon the Acts, and the 18th. upon the Romans.

Of the necessary Dispositions to communicate worthily.

NOne of the Fathers have spoken more powerfully and largely than S. Chrysostom, concerning the necessary Dispositions to communicate worthily, nor more dreadfully against unworthy Communicants.

He requireth in the first place, that those who draw near to the Lord's Table, should put away their Sins.

It is written (saith he in the First Sermon of Penance) That without Holiness no Man shall see God; but whosoever is unworthy to see God, is not worthy to partake of the Body and Blood of Christ; wherefore S. Paul will have a Man to examine himself, &c. Reform the Disorders of your life past, and then come to that holy Table, and participate of that Sacri∣fice with a pure and unspotted Conscience.

He saith the same things in the 22d. Homily of Statues; Seeing we are advancing into Lent, let us advance in Vertue; it is in vain to run, except we get the prize of the Race: Our Au∣sterities and Fastings will profit us nothing, if we come not to the holy Table with an exact purity of Heart: For Lent, Prayers and Sermons are appointed in the Church, for no other purpose, but to make us participate safely of the unbloody Sacrifice, and to wash away with the Waters of Repentance, the filthinesses of our Sins; without this our labour is vain: But if by Abstinence you have corrected one Vice, and gained one Vertue, and put off one evil habit, then you may boldly take place at the Table of the Lord.

He recommends the same thing in the Homily of Seraphims. I tell you plainly, saith he, I pray, I beseech you not to come to the Lord's Table with a Conscience defiled with Crimes: For to communicate in this condition, is not Communion, but Condemnation; and tho' you should a thousand times come to the Body of Jesus Christ in that condition, yet instead of recei∣ving benefit by it, you would become the more guilty. Let Sinners therefore keep away; that is, those who persevere in their Sin. This I warn you of betimes, even now, that when the day of that heavenly Feast shall come, you may not say, I am unprepared, you should have gi∣ven me warning.... I know that we are all guilty, that no man can boast of having a pure heart in this World: That's not the worst; but that not having a pure heart, they will not draw nigh unto him that can purifie them.

But to be pure is not sufficient, according to S. Chrysostom, to partake of that holy Table; Men must have a care besides, that they come not thither negligently.

Let no Man (saith he in the 83d. Homily upon S. Matthew) approach this Sacred Table with disgust, negligence or coldness; but let all come with a longing desire, with zeal and love.... You ought there∣fore to watch over your own actions carefully, knowing that those who receive unworthily the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, are threatned with a dreadfull punishment. If you cannot endure, without horrour, Judas's crime, who sold his Master; and the Jew's ingratitude, who crucified their King; beware also of becoming guilty of profaning the Body and Blood of Je∣sus Christ: Let no Judas, no covetous Man come hither; let none but true Disciples of Jesus Christ be present at that Feast, &c.

For this Reason this holy Father observes in the Homily of Judas's Treachery, that this holy Altar is not to be approached unto without reverence.... That no Hypocrite, no Man full of iniquity ought to come near to this Sacred Table.

According to these Principles, (he saith in the 17th. Homily upon Hebrews) That, generally speaking, no reckoning is to be made either of those who communicate but once in the Year, or of those that doe it often, or such as receive seldom; but of those that communicate with a pure Conscience, a clean Heart, and a blameless Life. Let as many as are thus disposed come always; and as many as are not, let them not come once, because they cannot but draw God's Judgments upon themselves, and become worthy of Condemnation. Doe you think that Forty days Penance is sufficient to cleanse you from all your Sins?

See upon the same Subject the 52d. Homily against those that Fast at Easter; the Homily upon the Nativity of Jesus Christ; the 7th. Homily upon S. Matthew; the 24th. 27th. and 41st. upon 1 Cor. the 3d. upon the Epist. to the Ephesians; the 17th. upon the Epist, to the Hebrews; the 5th. upon Titus and several other places.

Of Prayer.

GOD requireth of us servent and constant Prayer; he often with-holds those things that we ask of him to excite our Zeal.

This Observation is found in the First Homily con∣cerning Statues, in those upon Genesis, in the Commentary upon Psal. 7. and in the Homily upon these Words, Phil. 1. What then? Christ is preached. He describeth both the Conditions and the Effects of Prayer in the 2d. Homily upon Hannah. In the 5th. Homily upon the same Subject, he sheweth the Strength and Virtue of Prayer; He lays down the Necessity of Prayer in several places of his Works. See the 22d. Homily upon S. Matthew, the 36th. upon S. John; he speaks of Thanksgiving in the 25th. upon Matthew, in the 35th. upon S. John's Gospel, and in the 14th. upon 2 Cor.

Of Attention in Prayer.

WE pay less respect to God, than a Servant doth to his Master, a Soldier to his General, or even a Friend to his Friend; for we speak to our Friends with attention: But whilst our Knees are on the ground, and we are treating with God about the business of our Salvation; whilst we beg pardon for our Crimes, we faint, our Mind is at Court, or at the Bar, and there is no correspondence betwixt our Thoughts and our Words. We daily commit this fault, &c.

Many go into the Church, and there utter a great number of Prayers; and then come out, not knowing what they have said: They move their Lips, but they do not apply their Minds to their Discourses. What? you hearken not to what you say, and would you have God hear it? I kneeled, say you, but your Heart was some-where else: Your Mouth uttered Petitions, but your Mind was about Bargains, Trading, Exchange or Visits. It is in the time of Prayer that the Devil assaults us, knowing that then we profit spiritually; he suggests to our Spirits a multi∣tude of Thoughts.

See the 36th. Homily upon the Acts, wherein he exhorts Christians to pray in the Night.

Of Humility, against Pride.

HUmility, according to S. Chrysostom, is the principle of all Vertues, and the ground of all good Works. This he proveth in the 47th. Homily upon S. Matthew:

We should not be lifted up for our good Works, but acknowledge our unworthiness before God. Vertues are like Riches; if we expose them publickly, we are in danger of losing them; to preserve them, they must be hid. The more good we doe, the less we should boast of it; if we be proud for it, we lose its reward. The greatest Action, and the most acceptable to God, is to entertain low Thoughts of our selves.... Nothing conduces more to make us beloved of God, than to reckon our selves most imperfect; that is the heighth and perfection of Wisdom.

See the 3d. Homily upon S. Matthew; the 4th. upon the same Gospel; the latter end of the 25th. and 65th. upon the same; the 28th. 38th. 41st. and 48th. upon S. John; the 21st. upon the Romans; the 11th. upon 2 Thessal. and the 2d. Homily upon the Epistle to Titus; where he speaks against the love of Glory.

Of Christian Watchfulness.

S. Chrysostom describeth in several places the various Devices which Satan useth to tempt us, very eloquently. Upon this Subject one may consult the Homily of the Tempter, where he proves that Temptations are profitable for us, provided we stand always upon our guard, and watch continually over our selves. This he recommends in that place, and in the 13th. Homily upon S. Matthew; where he proves, that in this World the Devil's temptations are to be resisted: In the 14th. where he shews that the diseases of the Soul are not to be neglected; and in many other places, where he gives both Precepts and Means to avoid Temptations and Sins.

Against Covetousness.

S. Chrysostom declares his Indignation against Covetous Men in many places, and the Picture which he makes of them is enough to beget in us an abhorrency to them. Thus he speaks of them, Hom. 9. upon 1 Cor.

What can be more impudent, shameless and bold, than a misera∣bly covetous Man? A Dog is more modest than the covetous Man, who seizeth upon that which is another Man's. Nothing is more filthy, than those Hands which take all; nothing more cruel, than that Mouth which devoureth all, and is never satisfied. Look not upon his Face and Eyes, as if they were the Eyes and Face of a Man. The covetous Person is never contented, till he hath got all that the World hath; all is brutish in his Face; he is Inhumanity itself, &c.

In the 39th. Homily upon 1 Cor. he sheweth how abominable a thing a covetous Man is, who having gathered great quantities of Corn, to sell it dear, laments, because it is growing cheap. In another place, Hom. 18. upon the Epistle to the Ephesians; he says that Covetousness is a kind of Idolatry. He carries the same Notion in the 64th. Homily upon S. John. In a word, all his Homilies are full of Invectives against covetous Men; He writes against Usury in the 56th. Homi∣ly upon S. Matthew, in the 12th. upon the Romans, and in the 15th. upon 1 Cor.

Of Meekness, and against Anger.

THo' S. Chrysostom's Zeal gave his Enemies occasion to accuse him of being passionate; yet one may easily judge by his Writings, that he was a great lover of Meekness, and that he disap∣proved of Passion; See his Moral Exhortations, in the 29th. Homily upon S. Matthew, the 33d. and 48th. upon S. John, the 6th. upon the Acts, and the 17th. upon the Epistle to the Ephesians.

Against Envy.

ENvy is the most abominable of Sins: Hell never produced one more to be abhorred. Other Sinners have some pleasure; but the Envious Man torments himself, whilst he torments o∣thers. Envy hath been the cause of all mischief. This crime is so much the more dangerous, because no Penance is enjoyned for it. Men fansie they may blot it out by some small Alms, or a short Fast; they do not weep bitterly for it, as for Adultery or Fornication, &c.

These are some of S. Chrysostom's Notions about Envy, taken out of the 40th. Homily upon S. Matthew. One may read upon the same Subject the Homily upon Pasl. 49. Hom. 37. upon S. John, the 3d. upon 1 Cor. the 24th. and 27th. upon 2 Cor. and the 3d. upon the Epistle to the Philippians.

Against Drunkenness.

THere is not a more dangerous or hatefull Sin than Drunkenness, saith S. Chrysostom, in the first Discourse upon these words of S. Paul to Timothy, Use a little Wine for thy stomach's sake, and thine often infirmities. A Drunkard is a dead Man living, voluntary sick, a person useless either for the Commonwealth, or for his Family; one whose presence is intolerable, whose breath, voice and steps are equally odious.

See the 27th. Homily upon the Acts, the 25th. upon the Epistle to the Romans. See also the 56th. Homily upon S. Matthew, and the 27th. upon the Acts.

Against Swearing and Blasphemies.

S. Chrysostom discourseth against Swearing and Blasphemies almost in all the Homilies of Sta∣tues, where he declaimeth vehemently against that Vice.

See also the 8th. 10th. and 11th. Homilies upon the Acts.

Concerning Publick Shows and Stage-plays.

S. Chrysostom living in Two great Imperial Cities, where Plays, Shows, Comedies, &c. were very frequent, and to which the People were much addicted; one needs not wonder, that he should so often and so earnestly inveigh against those disorders. He calls their Stages, Schools of Lewd∣ness, Academies of Incontinence, and Pestilential Pulpits.

There, saith he, you see lewd Wo∣men representing Adulteries, and uttering Blasphemies. With what Eyes will you look upon your Wives, your Children, Servants or Friends at your going out of such places? He refu∣teth in another Sermon the specious pretences they had to plead for Plays: these are his Words. What harm, say you, is there in going to see a Play? Is that sufficient to keep one from the Communion? But I will ask you, Whether there can be a more shameless Sin, than to come to the holy Table, being defiled with Adultery? Yes, it is a kind of Adultery to go to a Play; and if you will not believe me, hear the Words of him who is to judge of our life. Jesus Christ tells us, That whosoever looketh upon a Woman to lust after her, committeth Adultery. What can be said of those, who passionately spend whole days in those places, in looking up∣on Women of ill fame and reputation: With what face will they dare to affirm, that they beheld them not to lust after them? And so much the rather, because they hear lascivious Speeches, they see wanton Actions, they are entertained with amorous Songs, and with Voices capable of stirring up shamefull Passions; they see Women dressed, painted, and adorned on purpose to inspire Love. The Assistants are in such confusion and idleness, as promote Riotings; and these are natural effects both of the preparations and consequences of Plays. The Musical Instruments, Consorts and Songs, are equally dangerous; they flatter strangely, they effeminate the heart, and prepare it to yield to the snares laid for them by profligate Women. For if in the Church it self, where Psalms are sung, the Scripture is read, where the dread of the Almighty appears, and Men are in a posture of reverence? If, I say, in that so venerable a place, Lust will creep in as a Thief, How shall they be able to overcome the motions of Concupiscence, that constantly frequent the Stage, who neither see nor hear any thing but what is profane and dangerous; whose Hearts are full of evil Thoughts, and whose Eyes and Ears are assaulted continually? But if this be impossible, how shall they justifie themselves from the guilt of Adultery? And if they are Adulterers, how can they pretend to come into the Church, and to participate of the holy Table before they have done Penance?

See the 4th. Homily concerning Hannah, the 1st. 7th. 17th. 37th. and 38th. upon S. Mat∣thew, the 32d. and 58th. upon S. John, and the 17th. Homily upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, against Mountebanks, and Jesters, and Stage-players.

Of Balls and Gaming.

S. Chrysostom exclaimeth as much against Balls and publick Meetings, as he does against Stage-plays.

There are (saith he in the 23d. Homily to the People of Antioch) no Enemy so dan∣gerous as those nocturnal Recreations, those pernicious Meetings and Dances. Our former mis∣carriages call for Tears, for Shame and Sorrow, and yet Mirth breaks out every-where..... I shall say nothing of idle Expences; but I am very much troubled at Gamings and Taverns; how much is there of Impiety and Intemperance? He speaks against Games of Chance in the

15th. Homily to the People of Antioch; where he shews, that they are occasions of Blasphemies, Losses, Anger, Quarrels, and all manner of Crimes.

Of the Dignity and Qualifications of the Ministers of Jesus Christ.

WE have already set down S. Chrysostom's Opinion concerning the Dignity and Excellency of the Priesthood, when we mentioned his Books upon that Subject, and the Homilies con∣cerning the History of Uzziah. We also joyned to that some places of the same Treatise, con∣cerning the Qualifications of a Bishop, and the Weight of his Office. But to those one may add, what he says to the same purpose, in the 1st. Homily upon the Epist. to Titus, and in the 3d. upon the Acts; where he openly declares his Opinion, that few Bishops were saved. Upon the same Subject one may consult the 1st. Homily upon the Epistle to the Corinthians, the 4th. upon that to the Philippians, and the 3d. upon the Acts. He enjoyns Christians in several places to be very respectfull towards the Priests; as in the Homilies upon the Song of Hannah, in the 22d. upon S. Matthew, in the 86th. upon S. John, and in the 2d. upon the 1st. Epist. to Timothy. His Observation in this Last is, That we should not hear those Pastours that are fallen into Here∣sy; but, on the contrary, we ought to avoid them, and separate from them: But not from wick∣ed

Priests, whose Character is to be honoured; because, notwithstanding their Wickedness, they truly offer the holy Sacrifice, and validly administer the Sacraments.

Upon the Usefulness and Excellency of a Monastick Life.

WE have sufficiently declared S. Chrysostom's Opinion of a Monastick Life, in the Extracts of the Treatises which he composed in his Retirement. To these one may add the Homily of Sta∣tues, where he speaks of the Egyptian Monks, the 1st. 8th. 55th. 69th. 70th. 71st. 72d. upon S. Mat∣thew, and the 14th. upon the 1st. Epist. to Timothy.

Of the State of Marriage, and of the Duties of Married Persons.

IN the first place S. Chrysostom requireth, that in chusing of a Wife, Men. should have greater regard to Vertue than Riches. He lays down this Maxim in the 74th. Homily upon S. Mat∣thew; there he pleasantly shews how much rich Wives prove troublesome to their Husbands. He says the same thing in the 48th. and 56th. Homilies upon Genesis, in the 49th. upon the Acts, in the 12th. upon the Epistle to the Colossians, and in the 17th. 19th. and 28th. Sermons of the 5th. Volume. He exhorteth Husbands to live well with their Wives, and shew them good Ex∣amples. In the 38th. Homily upon Genesis, in the Exposition of the 43d. Psalm; in the 30th. Homily upon S. Matthew, and the 20th. upon the Epistle to the Ephesians; in the 10th. upon the Epistle to the Colossians, he treateth at large of the Love which Husbands ought to have for their Wives, and of the respect that Wives ought to shew towards their Husbands. He discourses upon the same Subject in the 26th. Homily upon 1 Cor. and the 60th. upon S. John.

Of the Education of Children, and the Duties of the Master of a Family.

S. Chrysostom being yet in his Retirement, and sensible of the little care that Fathers took to bring up their Children well, employs part of the Third Book against those that found fault with a Monastick Life, to complain of that miscarriage; and goes so far as to affirm, That a Father who breeds up his Child ill, is more cruel than he that puts him to death; because he makes him liable to eternal Damnation, which is infinitely worse than loss of life. This matter is handled likewise in the Homilies concerning Hannah; where he shews, That not only Fathers, but Mo∣thers also are obliged to give their Children good Education. In the 60th. Homily upon S. Mat∣thew, he blameth the Carelesness of Parents in the choice of a Tutour. Lastly, In the 21st. and 22d. Homilies upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, he admonishes Fathers to be less sollicitous about their Children's getting School-learning; and to take more care that they be taught Piety and the Christian Religion. Read the 59th. Homily upon S. Matthew; the 9th. upon 1 Tim. and the 1st. upon Rom. where he discourseth of the Duties of a Master in a Family, in relation to his Wife, Children and Servants. He observes in the 15th. Homily upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, That a Mistress is not to abuse her Maid-servants. See also the 16th. Homily upon the 1st. Epistle to Timothy.

Of Afflictions.

S. Chrysostom not only teaches us that we ought to bear the losses, sicknesses, and other afflicti∣ons that may happen in this World patiently: But he shews besides, that they are the por∣tion of all good Men: He gives Eight Reasons for it, worth reading, in the Homily upon these Words of S. Paul to Timothy, Use a little Wine; in the 4th. and 5th. Discourses concerning Sta∣tues; in the 28th. Homily upon the Epistle to the Hebrews; in the 33d. upon S. Matthew; in the 8th. upon 2Tim. and in the 28th. and 29th. Homilies upon the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Of Death.

S. Chrysostom's Homilies are full of excellent Instructions concerning Death; wherein he shews, that instead of fearing Death, a Christian ought to desire it.

To what purpose, saith he in the 5th. Homily of Statues, should a Man fear sudden Death? Is it, because it brings us the sooner to our Haven, and hastens our passage to an happy life? What folly is this? We expect eternal felicity, and those good things which no Eye hath seen, no Ear heard, and which ne∣ver entred into the Heart of Man; and yet we doe not only put off the fruition of them, but we fear it, yea we abhor it.

He tells us in other places, That this life, being but a journey, a train of Miseries, a banishment from our own Country, &c. we should be very miserable if it never were to end.

See the 21st. and 32d. Homilies upon Genesis; the Discourse upon these Words of S. Paul, Be not sorry for the death of your Brethren; where he carries this Notion further, and saith, That we should be as glad to go out of this World as Criminals are to get out of Prison. See the 1st. Homily upon Genesis, the 14th. upon the Epistle to Timothy, and the 7th. upon the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Last of all, He hath one Sermon to prove that Death is not to be feared.

From these Principles, he concludes in several places, that we ought not to weep for the Dead, but on the contrary rejoyce; for that they have quitted this miserable life, to enter into one which is both eternal and happy. See the 34th. Homily upon S. Matthew, the 62d. upon S. John, the 21st. upon the Acts, the 6th. upon the Epistle to the Thessalonians, and the 4th. upon the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Christian Maxims which S. Chrysostom lays down and maintains in his Sermons.

WE ought not to be addicted to the Goods of this World. Hom. 2. upon Matthew.

Persons who are not vertuous, will receive no advantage from the Vertues of others. Hom. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. in Matthew.

The Vertue of our Relations will doe us no good, if we our selves want Piety. Hom. 10. on Matt.

Men ought to exercise themselves in the practice of all Vertues. Hom. 11. on Matthew.

No Mercy is to be looked for after Death, but only severe Justice; there is no middle place be∣tween Hell or Heaven. Hom. 14. upon Matthew.

He that reflects upon the joys of Heaven, will find it easie to practise Vertue. Hom. 16. upon Matthew.

The Commandments of God are not impossible to those that are willing to keep them. Hom. 21. on Matthew. Nay, they are easie with God's grace. Hom. 56. and 76. on Matthew, and 87. upon S. John.

Let him that is in the State of Grace, not trust too much to his own strength, lest he fall; nei∣ther let him that is fallen, despair. Hom. 26. and 67. upon Matthew.

Spiritual advantages are to be preferr'd before those things that otherwise seem to be most ne∣cessary. Hom. 26. upon Matthew.

A Man of an ill life, is worse than a dead Man. Hom. 26. upon Matthew.

Passionate, intemperate, debauched, and covetous Men are worse than those that are possessed with the Devil. Hom. 28. upon Matthew.

The Yoke of Vertue is light and easie, that of Sin is heavy and troublesome. Hom. 38. upon Matthew, and 88. upon John.

We ought to examine, and be sorry for our faults, and not be concerned for those of other Men. Hom. 24. upon Matthew, and 60. upon S. John.

Vertue is more to be esteemed than Miracles. Hom. 46. upon Matthew.

To feed the Poor is better than to give Ornaments of Gold or Silver to the Church. Hom. 50. upon Matthew.

He that offends another, wrongs himself more than the other. Hom. 51. upon Matthew.

A Man that is addicted to worldly things, is in the most unhappy slavery that can be. Hom. 58. upon Matthew.

It is better to adorn our Souls with Vertue, than the Body with rich Clothes. Hom. 69. upon Matthew.

A Soul polluted with Crimes, stinks worse than a putrefied Body. Hom. 57. upon Mat∣thew.

It is to no purpose to have been Baptized, and to be in the true Church, unless we lead our Lives conformably to the Doctrine of the Gospel, and our Baptismal profession. Hom. 6. and 10. upon John.

Whatever appears great in this World is nothing before God. Hom. 44. in Joan.

Nothing ought to be better husbanded than Time. Hom. 58. upon John.

We should not ask of God temporal, but spiritual Goods. Hom. 43. and 54. upon John.

A Christian ought to work not only for himself, but also for others. Hom. 20. upon the Acts.

It often happens that those who design to afflict the Righteous, and hinder the purposes of God concerning them, doe further them when they do not intend it. Hom. 49. upon the Acts.

The loss of worldly Goods ought not to be lamented, but that only of the joys of Heaven. Hom. 10. upon the Romans.

We ought to doe that which is good in this World, and not depend upon the Prayers of our kin∣dred and friends after death. Hom. 42. upon 1 Cor.

The Salvation of others ought to be preferred before our own satisfaction. Hom. 29. upon 2 Cor.

Vertues are like Treasures, they must be hid to be kept: If they be exposed publickly, there is danger of losing them. Hom. 3. upon Matthew.

To be Master of one's own Passions, is true liberty. Hom. 17. upon 1 Tim.

Nothing is to be lamented but Sin. Hom. 3. upon the Hebrews.

No Man is offended but by himself. See his Discourse upon this Paradox and his Letters Passim.

It is easie to get Vertue, and preserve it too. Passim.

It is more easie to live well, than ill. Passim.

Small Sins are to be avoided as well as great ones. Passim.

One only Sin, one evil Action is sufficient to condemn us eternally. Passim.

The accusation of Conscience is the greatest torment. Passim.

It is better to suffer our selves, than to make others suffer. Epist. to Olympias.

The ignominy of this World, is glory in the eyes of God. Passim.

This present life is death, and death is life. Passim.

Afflictions, Persecutions, and Sicknesses, are desirable; but delights, pleasures and joy are to be feared. Passim.

God's chastisements are great benefits: The good things which he bestows in this world are great temptations. Passim.

Giving of Alms is the trade that brings the greatest profit. Passim.

Solitariness and a Monastick life, are more to be desired than the greatest Kingdoms. Passim.

True Soveraignty consists in commanding our own Passions. Passim.

It is an effect of God's bounty, that the execution of Precepts, which are necessary to our Sal∣vation, does not depend upon the weakness of our Bodies. Hom. in illud, Modico vino utere.

Sorrow is the product of Sin, and Sorrow takes away Sin: That which was the penalty of Sin, is become the Salvation of Man. Sin brought weakness into the World, and Sorrow hath de∣stroy'd Sin. Hom. 1. de jejun.

Our Worship is not like that of the Jews, which was loaded with many Ceremonies, and needed much preparation. He that went into the Temple to pray, was to buy Pigeons, to carry Wood, Fire, a Knife, and a Victim. Christians want no such thing: in every place they have an Altar, a Knife, and a Victim; or rather they themselves are the Altar, the Priest, and the Victim. In what place, or what condition soever they are, they may offer their Souls to God. Hom. 4. de Anna.

Man shall be punished for his Sins, either in this world, or in the next: He ought to be pu∣nished here, to prevent punishment hereafter. Serm. 5. de Lazaro.

Ignorance of the Scripture makes Heresies. Serm. 3. de Lazaro.

These are some of those Maxims wherewith S. Chrysostom filleth his Discourses; but he enlargeth upon them with such abundance, expoundeth them with so great Eloquence, and pursues them with so great strength, that it is impossible to discover their beauty without reading them in their Original. In reading of these Sermons, all Preachers ought to spend their time, and not in the Sermons of Modern Authors; which, for the most part, are full of nothing but empty Allego∣ries, false Notions, forced Declamations, unprofitable Questions, affectations of Wit, Jingles, An∣titheses, and other things of this nature, that have no correspondency with those Evangelical Truths, which ought to be preached with masculine and natural Eloquence.

But that S. Chrysostom's Works may be more easily read, and that the Editions which should be used, may be known, I shall draw up a Catalogue of the most considerable.

The first Collections of S. Chrysostom's Works were made of the Versions of his Book.

The first was Printed at Basle by Pfortzen anno 1504. There was another made in Germany by Cratander anno 1522. and one at Paris 1524. These were followedby the Edition of Frobenius in five Volumes, anno 1533, and 1547. which last is larger and more correct. That of Venice in 1574, in five Volumes, by Hervetus, is better than the foregoing; but the most perfect of these ancient Latin Editions is that of Nivelle, in four Volumes in Folio, of 1581. which was made by the advice and care of the most learned Men of that Age; as Billius, Hervetus, Nobilius, Zi∣nus, &c.

The first Greek Edition of all S. Chrysostom's Works, is the famous Edition of Eaton, procu∣red by the care and vast labour of the learned Sir Henry Savile, who having made enquiry in all

the Liberaries of the World for the Books that went under S. Chrysostom's Name caused them to be Printed in a very fair Character, and very exactly, with very just, very learned and useful Notes. He distinguished the Books that are S. Chrysostom's, from those that are dubious or supposi∣titious, and hath put them in an excellent Order for a first Edition. It is divided into eight Volumes.

The first contains the 67 Homilies upon Genesis, the Commentaries upon the Psalms, and Isaiah, the two Homilies upon the 50th. Psalm, which he places among the doubtful Books, and the Exposition of the 51st. 95th. and 100th. Psalms, and so on to the 107th. and upon the 119th. which he placeth among the supposititious Writings.

The Second Volume contains the 90 Homilies upon S. Matthew, and the 88 upon S. John.

The Third and the Fourth comprehend all the Homilies upon S. Paul.

The Fifth hath Sixty two Sermons upon several particular passages of the Holy Scripture, and Thirty four other Sermons upon the Saints or Festival days, with Seventy three Sermons upon several Subjects which he Ranks among the supposititious Books.

The Sixth Volume is made up of the Treatises of S. Chrysostom, the Homilies against the Jews, that of God's incomprehensibility, the Sermon of Anathema, his Sermon after he was ordained Priest, the Twenty two Discourses about Statues, and several other Sermons upon divers Subjects, and particularly of Penance, Fasting, Alms-deeds, and other Christian Vertues. At the latter end there are some Homilies which he puts among the Collections, that were anciently made out of S. Chry∣sostom, and some supposititious Sermons, with the Liturgy, and two Prayers to God.

The Seventh Volume begins with a Discourse upon the Scandal of certain Persons, caused by the Persecution and Malice of some Priests. After this is the Treatise wherein he proves that none is offended but by himself, Seventeen Letters to the Widow Olympias, and Two hundred forty three Letters to his Friends, with Five Letters of Constantius the Priest, and a hundred and five Sermons, which falsly bear S. Chrysostom's Name, the Authors whereof are not certainly known. These Sermons are followed by other Discourses of known Authors, viz. Six Homilies of Seve∣rianus of Gabala upon Genesis, the Homily of John the Faster about Penance, the Homily upon the Epiphany ascribed to S. Gregory Thaumaturgus, the Homily of the Cross, by Pantaleon a Monk of Constantinople, and Forty eight Homilies upon several Points of Morality, collected out of S. Chrysostom's works by Theodorus. That Volume endeth with Seven Prayers of S. Chrysostom, which are in Latin, the three last of them are supposititious.

The Last Volume containeth some Supplements of Books Printed in the other Volumes, the Seven Orations in praise of S. Paul, the Sermons upon Eutropius, upon the design which Men ought to have in Preaching, and upon some other Subjects. The Appendix to this Volume, hath several Books which are something like S. Chrysostom's. The First is an Answer in Theodorus's Name, to an Exhortation made by S. Chrysostom: Which is certainly spurious. The Second and Third are two Discourses of Libanius to Theodosius, upon the Sedition at Antioch. After these Discourses follow the Extracts which Photius hath taken out of S. Chrysostom and Isidore Pelusiota's Letters in Commendation of this Father. The Lives of S. Chrysostom take up a good part of this Volume: there are those that were written by George of Alexandria, the Panegyrick by Leo the Emperour, the Life of S. Chrysostom by an Anonymous Author, that of Simeon Metaphrastes.

The various Readings, Conjectures, Restitutions, and Notes of Savil, Bois, and Downs conclude the Volume, with a very useful Table of S. Chrysostom's Books, by their beginnings disposed in an Alphabetical Order. Another Table upon the Notes, and an Errata upon all the Volumes.

Almost at the same time that Sir H. Savil was at work in England, to publish an Edition of the Original Text of S. Chrysostom's works, Fronto Ducaeus labour'd in France, to Print them in Greek and Latin. He Printed them at Paris, Anno 1609. the first Volume which contains the Twenty one Sermons of Statues, and Fifty six others, with Notes at the end. In the same Year came out a Second Volume containing the Homilies and Sermons upon Genesis, the Five Ser∣mons concerning Hannah and Samuel, Three Homilies upon David and Saul, a Sermon against Idleness, a Translation of S. Chrysostom's Life written by Palladius, a Latin Sermon of Continency, and some other Sermons in Latin with Notes. The Third Volume Printed in 1614. contains the Homilies and Sermons upon the Psalms, and the Commentary upon Isaiah. The Fourth Volume Printed the same Year, contains the Works and Letters of S. Chrysostom, his First Sermon, and two others upon his Exile; it ends with the Notes of Fronto Ducaeus. The Fifth Volume is a Collection of Seventy Sermons upon several passages, both of the Old and New Testament, and upon some other Subjects; it was Printed in 1616. The Sixth contains Seventy three Sermons, which Fronto Ducaeus does not attribute to S. Chrysostom; the Homilies made up of Collections taken out of S. Chrysostom by Theodorus, and the Notes of Fronto Ducaeus. The works of S. Chry∣sostom upon the New Testament were not Printed then, because they had been lately Printed by Commelinus in Four Volumes. The First contains the Homilies of S. Chrysostom, and the imperfect Work upon S. Matthew, the Second, the Homilies upon S. John, the Third the Homilies upon the Acts; and the Last, the Homilies upon S. Paul, and the Commentary of Andreas Caesariensis upon the Revelations of S. John. These Books are in the Greek and Latin Edition of S. Chry∣sostom, Printed at Paris in 1633, and divided into Six Volumes, which is not so exact as the Edi∣tion of Commelinus, and the Six first Volumes that were Printed in 1636, are not so exact as those that were Printed before.

The Latin Edition of Ducaeus Printed at Paris in 1613. Containeth, besides the Books that are named already, a great many other Homilies which are not in the Greek, and which in all Likelihood were Composed by Latin Authors as we observ'd before. The Translation was all Revised by Fronto Ducaeus; it was Printed at Antwerp, and lately Printed at Lyons with some Additions. It is very strange, that those who took Care of this Edition, did not only leave the same confusion that is in the others, but have even confounded it more, and loaded it with many useless things.

[These are all the General Editions of S. Chrysostom's Works. I say nothing here of particular ones, whether Greek or Latin, of several of his Works, which are the Springs and Brooks that make up the great Rivers, because it would be too tedious in this Place. But the Catalogue of such as are come to my knowledge are in the following * 1.64 Note?

Antiochus and Severianus of Gabala.

IN the days of S. Chrysostom there were two famous Preachers, who preached in his Church, in his Absence; The first, Antiochus, was Bishop of Ptolemais in Phoenicia; and the Second, * 1.65 Severianus, was Bishop of Gabala in Coelesyria. Antiochus came first to Constantinople, where having preached a long time, and got some Money, he returned to his Church. Severianus ha∣ving heard that Antiochus was become rich by preaching at Court, resolved to imitate him, and therefore went thither with several Sermons which he had prepared. He was well received by S. John Chrysostom, into whose favour he endeavoured at first to insinuate himself, afterwards he grew acquainted with several Persons of Quality, and got into the favour both of the Emperor and the Empress: and tho' he wanted Antiochus his parts, yet he got into great Esteem and Re∣putation. S. Chrysostom being obliged (as hath been observed) to go into Asia, to compose the Affairs of the Church of Ephesus, found not a Bishop fitter to preach in his Absence than Seve∣rianus of Gabala, whom he thought to be his Friend. But whether this Bishop, taking occa∣sion of S. Chrysostom's Absence, had a design to get into the Esteem and Affection of the People of Constantinople to usurp that See, or whether Serapion, S. Chrysostom's Archdeacon, had by his Letters begot in S. Chrysostom an Aversion to Severianus of Gabala as a Person that disturbed the Peace of his Church, aiming at getting into his place; or Lastly, whether there was any secret Jea∣lousie betwixt them; These two Bishops were never Friends ever afterwards. S. Chrysostom be∣ing come back, drove away Severianus, accusing him of saying, that the Son of God was not made Man, because that Bishop finding that Serapion would not stand up before him had uttered these Words, If Serapion dies a Christian, the Son of God is not made Man. This Serapion told S. Chrysostom, leaving out the first part, If Serapion dies a Christian. But Severianus being well at Court, the Empress recalled him, and did all she could to reconcile them, which S. Chrysostom refused to do, till the Empress intreated him for the sake of Theodosius her Grand-Child, whom she laid at his Feet in the Church of the Apostles. S. Chrysostom (if Socrates may be credited) could not then resist the intreaties of the Empress: but this Reconciliation was not sincere, and both these Bishops harboured still an Aversion one to the other. And therefore, in the time of S. Chrysostom's Disgrace, Severianus sided with Theophilus, and the rest of his Enemies to destroy him. This is the Account which Socrates gives of the Dissention of Severianus of Gabala; Hist. Eccl. B. VI. cap. 11.

The Author of S. Chrysostom's Life accuses this Historian of want of sincerity upon this occa∣sion; But till we meet with another Historian of greater credit, setting forth the matter of Fact after another manner, we cannot reject this Relation, nor feign other Motives of Dissention betwixt these two Bishops, than those related by Socrates, who lived near S. Chrysostom's time.

The ancient Translator of some of S. Chrysostom's Homilies, Anianus, observes, That Antiochus had, plausibilem dicendi pompam, a pompous and lofty Stile, which got him the applause of the People. There is no doubt, but formerly they had several of his Sermons. Gennadius mentions but two of his Books: The former is a long Treatise against Covetousness, and the latter a Discourse upon the Miracle of the blind Man, to whom Jesus Christ restored sight, spoken of in the Ninth Chap∣ter of S. John's Gospel: a work of Unction and Humility. Trithemius mentions several Sermons, and other unknown works of this Author. Theodoret quoteth a passage of his, but does not Name the Book where he found it, the words are these. That if we do not confound the two Natures in Christ, there will be no difficulty in understanding the Mystery of the Incarnation. Gelasius in his Book of the two Natures, citeth also some places of Antiochus upon the Incarnation, taken out of his Sermons upon the Nativity, Easter, against Hereticks, and from another Sermon. Lastly, Possevinus tells us, That there were some Homilies of this Author in the Medicean Li∣brary at Florence. I don't know whether they were ever published.

Severianus of Gabala was less eloquent, dryer, and more barren, than Antiochus. Socrates ob∣serves, that he pronounced the Greek Language ill, because he still kept some thing of the Sy∣riack Accent. Gennadius says, That he had read a Commentary of this Author, upon the Epi∣stle to the Galatians, and a Treatise upon the Festival of Christ's Baptism, and the Epiphany.

We have observed already, that among S. Chrysostom's works there are several Sermons, which in all appearance belong to Severianus of Gabala, and among the rest a Discourse of the Seals, and upon the brazen Serpent, which are quoted by Theodoret, under the Name of Severianus of Gabala, and several others in the same Stile, whereof we have given a Catalogue amongst S. Chry∣sostom's works: To these we may joyn the Homily upon Christ's Nativity, which is in the Fifth Volume of the Eaton Edition of S. Chrysostom's works, Pag. 843. and the Sermon of the Cross in Greek in the same Volume, P. 898, which afterwards was Printed in Greek and Latin by Father Combefis, cited by S. Damascen in the third Discourse of Images, under the Name of Severianus of Gabala. We have also Six Sermons of the same Man upon the Creation of the World, Prin∣ted in Greek in the Eaton Edition of S. Chrysostom, and in Greek and Latin, in the last Volume of the Supplement to the Bibliotheca Patrum, by Father Combefis. Severianus observes in the Preface, that all the Books of the Holy Scripture have the Salvation and Benefit of Men for

their ultimate End: but that the Book of Genesis is the Ground and Fountain of all the Truths, both in the Law and in the Prophets, because it containeth the History of the World's Creation, without which God's works cannot be known. He adds, That he very well knew, that several Fathers had written of that matter, but that it did not discourage him from writing upon the same Subject, since the latter Writers were not discouraged by the Discourses of the former: that he pretended not to destroy what others had done, but to add such things as might serve for the Edification of the Church: At last, he desireth his Auditors, not to inquire whether his Notions be new, but only whether they are right: In Prosecution of the same Subject, he saith, that Genesis is an History written by the Lawgiver Moses, and dictated by the Holy Ghost who inspired him: That tho' it be a Narration, yet it may be called a Prophecy, because that, as there are three sorts of Prophecies, the first of Writings, the Second of Actions, and the third of both: So likewise there are three parts of each Prophecy: That the first respects the present, the Second what is to come, and the third what is past. Men Prophesie upon the present, when they discover what is designed to be kept from them: as Elisha did, who knew Gehazis wicked∣ness: Men Prophesie upon the future, when what is to come is foretold. And there are also Pro∣phecies of what is past, when by Divine Inspiration things already passed are written, whereof no knowledge was had otherwise. In this Sence Severianus saith, that Moses was a Prophet in the History of the World's Creation. He observes further, that Moses proposed to himself two things in his Writings, to teach, and to gives Laws: That he began by Instruction in relating the Creation of the World, to teach Men, that God having created them, had a right to give them Laws and Precepts. For, saith he, had he not shewed at first, that God is the Creator of the World, he could not have justifyed, that he was the Soveraign Lawgiver of Men: because it is Tyranny to pretend to impose Laws upon those, that do not belong to us, whereas it is very natural to instruct such as depend upon us. He endeth this Preface by shewing the Reason, why Moses spake not of the Creation of Angels and Archangels: First because it was not pertinent to his Subject: Secondly, because had he done it, there was danger that Men would have worshipped them.

After this he explains the Text of Genesis about the World's Creation, in a plain and literal way: He doth not inlarge upon the spiritual Sence, but rather finds fault with some Explications, as being too much Allegorical. But he maketh several trifling Reflections, as when he observes in the Fifth Homily, that the first Man was called Adam, a word signifying Fire in the Hebrew, because that as this Element easily spreads and Communicates it self, so the World was to be peo∣pled by this first Man. Several other Notions of this Nature may be found in that Work, which have neither Beauty, nor Exactness, nor Truth. He Answers the Arians and Anomaeans. He ob∣serves in the Fourth Homily, that all Heresies bear the Names of their Authors, whereas the true Church has none other Name, than that of Catholick Church. He inlargeth but little upon Morals; yet at the Latter end of this Fourth Homily he recommends Fasting, provided it be accompanied with Abstinence from Vices. In a word, One may say that this whole Work, tho' full of Erudition, yet is of no great use, and deserveth not the Esteem of Men of true Judgment.

Father Combefis hath added to these Homilies some Fragments taken out of some Catena's upon the Scripture, attributed to this Author, and extracted out of his Commentaries upon Ge∣nesis, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and upon Joshua. But if these passages did not shew them∣selves to be written in Severianus his Stile, one could not affirm it upon the credit of these Ca∣tena's. One might with greater Confidence produce two passages of Severianus of Gabala upon the Incarnation, quoted by Gelasius in the Book of the two Natures, where he observes, That the first is taken out of a Discourse of this Bishop against Novatus.

ASTERIUS AMASENUS.

ASterius a 1.66 Bishop of Amasea a City of Pontus, flourished at the latter end of the Fourth Century b 1.67, and in the beginning of the Fifth. The Sermons of this Bishop have been * 1.68 quoted with Commendation by the Ancients c 1.69. There are but a small number of them extant, Collected by F. Combefis at the beginning of his first Volume of the Supple∣ment to the Bibliotheca Patrum; The Five first were Printed formerly by Rubenius, who published them at Antwerp, Ann. 1608. and afterwards inserted into the Bibliotheca Patrum:

The six following were lately published by F. Combefis, who joyned to them the Extracts made by Photius out of the Homelies of Asterius Amasenus, and a Discourse upon S. Steven the Proto-Martyr, formerly published under the Name of Proclus.

The first Sermon is upon the Parable of Dives and Lazarus. He begins it with this Reflecti∣on;

That our Saviour not only made use of Precepts to teach us Vertue, and to forbid Vice, but that he further proposed illustrious Examples to instruct us in that way of Life, which we ought to follow.

Afterwards he sets down the Text of S. Luke's Gospel, making moral Reflections upon each Verse.

Upon these words, Verse 26. There was a rich Man which was cloathed with Purple, and fine Li•…•…. He observes, that the Holy Scripture by these two words, understands all Extravagan∣cies of Riches, That the only use of Garments is to cover our Bodies, and defend them from the injuries of the Air: That God hath provided for this, by creating Beasts with hair and wooll, whereof Stuffs are made to secure us against both cold weather, and the Beams of the Sun. That besides he hath given the use of Flax for a greater Conveniency; that these things ought to be applyed to our use, in giving God thanks, not only because he made us, but also because he has provided all necessaries, to cover and defend us from the Injuries of the Season,

But, saith he, if you leave the use of Wooll and Linen, if you despise what God hath prepared, and to sa∣tisfie your Pride, you will have silk Garments, thin like Cobwebs; if after this you hire a Man at a dear rate to take out of the Sea a small Fish, that you may dye them in its Blood; Do you not Act the parts of effeminate Men?

He reproves those afterwards whose Garments were painted with several Figures, of Men, Beasts, and Flowers, and spares not those, who by a ridiculous Devotion, Printed upon their clothes some Godly Histories: As the Marriage of Cana in Galilee, the Sick of the Palsie in his Bed, the blind Man cured, the Woman that had an Issue of Blood, the Sinner at the feet of Jesus Christ, Lazarus risen again. Asterius speaks against this Practice after this manner: If these Persons will believe me, let them sell those clothes, and honour the true Images of God. Do not paint Je∣sus Christ, it is enough that he humbled himself, by taking voluntarily a Body for us.... Paint not the Paralytick upon your Garments, but seek for the poor to succour them. It is to no purpose to look upon the Woman having the Issue of Blood, but it is very necessary to help this poor Widow. It signifies nothing to behold the sinful Woman at the feet of Jesus Christ, but it will signifie much to bewail your own sins. What good will the Picture of Lazarus his Resurrection do you? endeavour rather to rise spiritually. To what purpose do you wear upon your Backs, the Image of him that was born blind? Ease this blind Man rather. Why do you draw the Shrines of Relicks? rather feed the poor. And wherefore do you carry about you the Representation of those Water-pots at the Marriage where our Saviour made Wine; while you suffer the poor to die for thirst? This passage hath been alledged by the Iconoclasts as favouring their Opinions. The Catholicks on the con∣trary have quoted another, taken out of an Homily of the same Author, concerning the Woman afflicted with the Issue of Blood, where he speaks of the Statue of Jesus Christ erected by the same Woman in Paneas, a Town of Palaestine. But neither of these passages, belong to the question be∣twixt the Catholicks, and the Iconoclasts; for this which we have transcribed, is not against Images placed in Churches, but against the Fancy of particular men, who trimmed their Habits with Figures, representing some Histories of the Bible; and that of the Statue of Jesus Christ set up by the Woman that was afflicted with an Issue of Blood, hath no Relation to the publick Service of Images.

But to return to our Sermon, Asterius Amasenus pursuant to his Subject, saith that Christians should beware of Luxury and Pleasures, because none can live in Pleasure without Riches. But, saith he, It is impossible to heap up much Riches without Sin. He excellently describes all the things that are necessary to those that seek their Pleasure, and having numbred them, he adds,

To have these things, how many poor Men must suffer? how many Orphans must be ruined? how many Widows must have weeping Eyes? and how many Persons must be brought to the utmost Misery? A Soul taken up with these, forgets her self, remembers not what she is, thinks not upon Death, nor a Resurrection, nor Eternity. And when the fatal and unavoida∣ble moment comes, that the Soul is ready to separate from the Body, then a remembrance of the Life past will be of little use: she then will think of Repentance, but it will be to no purpose. For then only will Repentance be available, when there is a Resolution of correcting our former Life. And regret and sorrow for sin seem to be of no use, when a Man is not in a condition either to do good, or to practise Vertue.

The rest of this Homily is a literal and moral Explication of that parable, full of solid Notions, and natural Reflections.

There is not less Eloquence in the Second Sermon of this Author, upon another Parable of S. Luke's Gospel, concerning that Steward whom his Master called to an Account for his Admini∣stration and for his Goods. It beginneth with this Maxim; That most Men's sins proceed from an opinion that the Goods which they possess are their own, and that they are absolute Masters of them; That this false perswasion is that which makes us go to Law, Quarrel, and make War for the wealth of this World, looking upon it as proper and convenient for us, and deserving our Love and Esteem.

Yet, saith he, it is nothing so; on the contrary we are to look upon all which we have received, as none of ours; we are not Masters of the things which we have at home; we are like Pilgrims, Strangers, Banished and Captives, carried whither we would not,

at a time when we expect it least, and at once we are stript of all, when the Soveraign Dispen∣ser of our fortune pleaseth.

This Notion he inlargeth upon in his Exposition of the Parable of the unjust Steward. There one may find excellent Sentences, upon the Contempt that Men should cast upon Riches, and upon the uncertainty of this present Life. He insists particu∣larly upon proving, that Men are not Owners, but Stewards of their wealth; and from this Principle he concludes, That as many as have received of God such good things ought to distri∣bute them faithfully, and be always ready, yea even desirous, to give God an Account. And at last he observes, That after Death there will be no time for Repentance: that this Life is the proper time to keep God's Commandments in, as the other is of enjoying the Reward of good Works.

The Third Sermon against Covetousness was preached by S. Asterius in one of those Assemblies which were made in Churches to celebrate the Festival of some of the Martyrs. This Homily is full of very natural Descriptions of the Hard-heartedness of covetous Men. Covetousness in his Opinion, doth not consist only in the unjust desire of having that which is anothers, but in a desire of having more than we ought to have. According to this Notion, it is easie to find in the Scriptures several Examples of covetous Men; and having produced them, he sheweth, that all other Vices waste with time: but that the older a Man grows the more covetous he is. This Remark is followed by a Description of a covetous Man, where he omits none of those Cha∣racters that can make him appear miserable, and render him odious to all the World. He pro∣veth that Covetousness is the Spring and Cause of all the Crimes and Sins committed in the World. And in short, he shews that it is to no purpose to be concerned for this World's Goods: but far better to put all our trust and confidence in God's providence and mercy.

The Fourth Sermon is against the profane Festival of the first day in the Year, and against the custom of New-years-gifts. Asterius Amasenus declaimeth against that Practice.

He saith, That the Liberalities of that day have no rational ground; That they cannot be called Tokens of Friendship, because true Friendship is not grounded upon Interest; That neither can they be called Alms, since the Poor partake not of them; That they are not of the Nature of Con∣tracts, seeing there is neither loan nor exchange in that Traffick. In a word, That they are not pure Gifts, since there is a necessity of giving them. What Name then, saith he, can be given to the Expense of that day? The Church gives a reason for all the Feasts which it cele∣brates. It keeps the Feast of Christmas, because upon that day God made himself known unto Men. At Candlemas it rejoyceth, because we are drawn out of the obscurity of Dark∣ness wherein we lay. Lastly, we celebrate with Joy, Pomp, and Alacrity the day of the Re∣surrection, for as much as this day represents unto us the Immortality which we are to enjoy. These are the Reasons which the Church hath to keep Feasts, and there are the like for the celebrating of all the rest: But what reason can be given for the Festival of New-Years-Day, and for the profusion then Practised? O Folly! O Impertience! At that day every one runs with a design to get another Man's Goods. Those that give, doe it with Grief, and they that receive Presents do not keep them, but bestow them upon others. One sends to his Pa∣tron, what he received of his Client: Another makes his Complement to receive Money. The poor give to the rich, and inferior people send Presents to the Great Ones. As Brooks make small Rivers, which at last fall into Great Ones; in like manner the Presents which the com∣mon People make to those above them, do all turn to the profit of great Lords, upon whom they bestow them: and thus this Feast is the beginning of Miseries, and the over∣whelming of the Poor. Farmers and Labourers are constrained to give to their Landlords; If they fail, they are abused. Miiserable People run like Fools through the Streets, asking from Door to Door, deafening every Body with their Noise and Cries. It is a day of Riot for Sol∣diers. The Consuls and Governours having made themselves rich with the Pay due to Sol∣diers, the Spoyls of Widows, and the publick Treasury, having got Money by selling Justice, by shameful Contracts, by distributing this Money to Fidlers, Stage-Players, Dancers, and Co∣medians, lewd Women, and base Fellows, are at this Expense to feed their Vanity. O Folly! O Blindness! God promises an eternal Reward to those who distribute to the Poor, but these rather chuse to spend foolishly, that they may get a vain and transitory Glory. But after all, what is the end of all that Vanity? what Figure soever any can make in this World, the end is always a Grave that buryeth Men in eternal Oblivion.

He describes here the fatal end of Ruffinus, and Eutropius, who just before were deprived both of their Dignities and of their Estates, and concludes with these words of the wise Man: Vani∣ty of Vanities.

Dignities, saith he, are Dreams and Visions, which vanish after having given some kind of delight for a very short time: They are Flowers, that dry on a sudden, having flourished for a while.

The First Sermon is about Divorce. Asterius shews there by several Reasons that Men are not to put away their Wives, yet he excepteth Adultery, and saith,

that if a Man puts away his Wife for Adultery, instead of taking her again, he commends him for avoiding a Person who by violating Chastity hath broken the indissoluble bond of Marriage. He observes, that the Law of the Gospel is the same for Men as for Women; but that the Roman Laws, have not observed the same Equity; not permitting Wives to leave their Husbands, but only Husbands to put away their VVives.

The reason commonly alledged of this difference, is, that Husbands

do not prejudice their Wives, in committing Adultery, whereas by this Crime, Wives doe intro∣duce into Families other Men's Children, and make them Heirs, who have no manner of Right. Asterius sticks not to say, that this Reason is impertinent, because Men abusing either Virgins or Wives, overthrow and dishonour their Respective Families, and wrong their Parents and their Husbands very considerably.

The Sixth Sermon upon the History of Susanna, is full of curious moral Notions. This is one.

A Man overtaken with a Sin is often drawn by that first Crime into all sorts of Iniquity, as on the contrary one Vertue is the cause of another.

The Seventh Sermon is upon the miraculous cure of the Man that was born blind, he exalts the Greatness of the Miracle, and draws an Argument for Christ's Divinity from it.

The Eighth is a Panegyrick in Commendation of S. Peter, and S. Paul; he shews there how wonderful their miracles were, and in several places establisheth S. Peter's Primacy amongst the Apostles.

All the Apostles, saith he, must give place to S. Peter, and Confess, that he alone deserveth the first Rank, if a comparison of the Graces God gave to the Apostles, is a Token of Priority of Honour.

The following Sermon is a Discourse in Commendation of Phocas the Martyr. He affirms in the Preface, that a remembrance of the Actions of Saints, and of the Martyrs Engagements, is one of the most powerful Arguments that can be, to encourage Christians to Piety and Vertue. He addeth that for this Reason they kept their Relicks, that they are exposed to sight in Shrines, that their Feasts are kept, and Churches built to their Honour, to refresh the Memory of their generous Actions. Afterwards he relates the Life of Phocas the Martyr, in a very plain and natural manner, without any mixture of such Histories as are rather miraculous than ratio∣nal. He ends, with the Honours that were paid to that Saint. He says, That the Memory of him was famous in the Countrey, where his Body lay; That at Rome he was respected almost as much as S. Peter and S. Paul, and that his Head was had in great Veneration. Asterius tells us that the Martyr Phocas, he speaketh of, was born as Sinope, and a Gardiner by Profession, with∣out mentioning that he was a Bishop. This is it perhaps, which hath occasioned the Distinction of two Phocas's Martyrs. The one martyr'd under Trajan, whose Feast is kept July 14. and the other simply a Martyr; whose remembrance is celebrated on the 5th. of March. The Greeks mention them both upon the 22d. of September. Perhaps it is but one and the same Man, whose History hath been variously reported. For both are supposed to have been of Sinope, and the same Miracles are ascribed to both. Be it as it will, Seamen chose this Saint for their Patron, as Aste∣rius observes at the latter end of this Homily.

The Tenth Sermon in Commendation of Martyrs, was preached in an Assembly, met toge∣ther for the Honour of the Martyrs. He begins with this Reflection:

Very often we receive much good from our greatest Enemies unawares. Had not Satan persecuted the Church, we should have had no Martyrs. He afterwards observes, That Martyrs are not only Patterns of Vertue, but also Accusers of Vice. And this, saith he, is thus to be understood. A Martyr hath con∣stantly endured fire and flame, why will you not tame the heat of Lust with Chastity? A Martyr hath not regarded all the wealth of the World, wherefore do you not despise a small Sum for the love of God? A Martyr hath put off his own Body for God's sake, why then will ye not part with the meanest Garment to cover a poor Man? We ought either to Ho∣nour and imitate the Saints as our Masters, or fear them as our Accusers. Out of Honour to Martyrs, we preserve their Relicks with Veneration, looking upon them as Vessels of Bene∣diction, Organs of blessed Souls, and assured Pledges of their Good-will. The Churches are guarded by the Martyrs, as by so many Soldiers. The afflicted make Addresses to them, and with Confidence implore their Intercession. It cureth Diseases, comforteth in Poverty, and appeaseth the anger of Princes. Finally the Churches of Martyrs are an Harbour in a Storm, and a refuge in all Miseries. The Father whose Child is sick, prayeth unto God for his Cure by the intercession of a Martyr, saying,

You Holy Martyr that suffered for Jesus Christ interceed for us. You who can Address to God with greater Boldness, carry this word for your fellow Ser∣vants. Tho' you are no longer in the World, yet you know the Pains and Afflictions of this Life. Your selves have formerly pray'd to the Martyrs, before you were Martyrs, they heard you when you intreated them, now that you can hear us grant ••s our Requests. But least ignorant Persons should yield to Martyrs the Honour which belongs only to God, he adds,

We doe not adore the Martyrs, but we Honour them as God's Servants. We Honour not Men, but admire them: VVe lay up their Relicks in beautified Shrines, and we build magnificent Churches to their Memory, to render them the same Honour in the Church, that is given in the VVorld to those that have done famous Actions.

He goeth on to establish this Principle in the rest of this Discourse, where he speaks so strongly of the worship of Saints and Martyrs against such as despise them, that it gives occasion of Suspicion whether this be not of a younger Age, than that of Asterius Amasenus.

The Eleventh Sermon is a Panegyrick upon S. Euphemia cited in the Seventh general Council, Act. 4. and by Photius. It seemeth not to me to be of Asterius Amasenus his Stile. The Author relateth the History of that Saint, and observes; that she was represented upon a VVinding-sheet that was near her Grave.

After these Sermons come those Extracts produced by Photius, Vol. 271. The first is taken out of a Sermon of Penance upon the sinful Woman, among the Works of Gregory Nyssen, to whom he ascribed it in the Second Volume of his Bibliotheca; but after serious reflection, I have found that it is more likely to be written by Asterius Amasenus.

The Second Extract is taken out of the Sermon upon S. Steven, among Proclus's Sermons. It differs from that which S. Gregory Nyssen made upon that Subject, tho' I confounded them in the Second Volume.

The Third is taken out of the Homily upon the Parable of the Traveller, who going to Jericho was taken and wounded by Thieves, Luk. 10. He supposeth that this Accident was real, and that Jesus Christ makes use of it to inform the Jews of the Greatness of his Charity and Mercy. This wounded man going down to Jericho, is the Figure of Adam, who by his Sin fell from the hap∣py State wherein he was created, and at the same time caused the Fall of all mankind. The Le∣vite and the Priest are Moses and S. John, who finding this Man, that is all mankind, destitute of Grace, Vertue and Piety, and wounded by his Enemies, did indeed look upon him with Compas∣sion, but could not cure him. That the Samaritan is Jesus Christ, who carries a Treasure of Grace, hidden till the time of the New Law. This Exposition of the Parable is pretty exact so far, but the Comparison he makes afterwards, betwixt the Body of Jesus Christ, and the Horse that carried this Samaritan is hardly tolerable, Because, saith he, the Body of Jesus Christ is as it were the Vehicle of the Divinity.

The Fourth Extract of Photius is taken out of an Homily upon the Prayers of the Pharisee and of the Publican, spoken of Luk. ch. 18. Here is an excellent Definition of Prayer.

Prayer is a confe∣rence with God, a forgetting of earthly things, and an Ascension into Heaven. He that pray∣eth standing with his hands lifted up to Heaven, doth by this posture of his Body represent the Cross; and if he prayeth with the Heart, and his Prayer is acceptable to God, he hath the Cross in his Heart. For Prayer extinguishes in him the Desires of the Flesh, the love of Ri∣ches, and puts off from his Spirit the thoughts of Pride and Vanity. He addeth, That Vain-glory corrupts the best Actions, as Prayer, Fasting, and Alms, &c. and renders them impro∣fitable.

The Fifth Extract is out of the Homily upon the History of Zacchaeus, it containeth nothing considerable.

The Sixth is upon the Parable of the prodigal Son. He saith that the Father spoken of in that Parable represents the Father of Eternity; That the two Sons, are two sorts of Men; That the prodigal Child is a Figure of those that have lost the Grace of Baptism; That the Portion of Goods which he desires of his Father, is the Grace of Baptism, and the Participation of the Body of Jesus Christ; That this Child doth indeed ask it well, but does not keep it, but goes into a foreign Countrey, that is he departeth from God's Commandments; That the Devil is that Citizen and Prince who commandeth the Swine, that is debauched Persons; That this Sinner at last acknow∣ledging his Fault, cometh back to God his Father, but with fear and confessing his unworthiness; That the Father full of Compassion and Mercy receiveth him, embraceth, and puts upon him new Robes; That these new Robes cannot be Baptism which cannot be received a second time, but Repentance, which is instead of Baptism, and which blotting out our Sins with tears, makes us clean and acceptable to God; That the Ring afterwards given to this prodigal Child, is the Seal of the Holy Ghost, which is given in Repentance as well as in Baptism.

The Seventh Extract is of a Sermon upon the cure of the Centurion's Servant. Photius saith, that Asterius upon occasion of that History, treateth of the Duties of Masters and Servants; That he adviseth Servants to obey their Masters readily and heartily; and exhorteth their Masters to use them with Meekness and Bounty, looking upon them as Brethren.

For, saith he, they are made of the same Mould with us, they have the same Creator, the same Nature, the same Passions; they have a Body and a Soul as we have, &c.

The Homily at the beginning of the Fast, from which Photius hath taken out the Eighth Extract, is in Latin among the Works of S. Gre∣gory Nyssen. I now Confess, that it rather belongs to Asterius, than to that Father.

The Ninth Extract is of the Homily upon the Man born blind, which we have entire.

The Tenth is upon the Woman having an Issue of Blood. There he speaks of the History of the Statue, which that Woman caused to be set up in Honour of Jesus Christ in the City of Paneas.

This is all that F. Combefis hath collected of the Works of Asterius Amasenus: but since that, Cotelerius in the second Volume of his Ecclesiastical Monuments, hath given us three Ho∣milies upon Psalm 5, 6, and 7. which he ascribeth to Asterius Amasenus, upon the Authority of two Catenae upon the Psalms. He observes that before these Homilies there was one upon Psalm 4. Printed in the Seventh Volume of the Eaton Edition of S. Chrysostom, pag. 431. which he like∣wise attributeth to the same Asterius. I confess I mis-trust very much the Quotations of these Catenae, and I should rather believe, that these Commentaries belong to Asterius the Philo∣sopher, who according to the Testimony of the Ancients, writ a Commentary upon the Psalms, than to the Bishop of Amasea, who is not said to have written upon that Sub∣ject. Cotelerius pretends that the Conformity both of Stile and Doctrine demonstrate that these Homilies were written by Asterius Amasenus. But tho' I pay a great deference to the Judg∣ment of that learned Man, yet I find no such Resemblance; however I would not be believed upon my own word, but leave it to those to judge, who will take the Pains to compare them.

The Stile of Asterius Amasenus is plain, but with a great deal of natural Beauty. His Chara∣cters and Descriptions are excellent: His Sermons would be esteemed in this Age, where those things are extremely valued. He is very severe in his Morals; the Reflections he makes are exact and solid. He explains the Scripture-Parables after an ingenious manner, and draws from them very useful Thoughts. He doth not excite his Auditors by violent Motions as great Orators do; but insinuates into their minds Christian Truths, by his agreeable and natural way of proposing them: and infensibly begets in them an Abhorrency of Vice, and a love of Vertue, only by a bare Pi∣cture lively drawn.

ANASTASIUS.

ANASTASIUS was chosen Bishop of Rome, after the Death of Pope Siricius, Anno. 398. He was an illustrious Person, as commendable for neglecting his private Interest, as for his * 1.70 Pastoral Vigilance. Under his Pontificate, Flavianus and the Eastern Bishops were re∣conciled to the Church of Rome, and to the other Western Churches. The business of the Origenists making a great noise in the Church, he thought it his Duty to declare his Sense of that matter: He therefore made a Decree after the Example of Theophilus, whereby he condem∣ned both the Works and the person of Origen, and being informed that Ruffinus the Priest was his chief Defender, he cited him to come to Rome, and appear before him: but Ruffinus deferring to appear, he condemned him as an Heretick in the Year 401. at the Sollicitation of a Lady called Marcella, who produced Evidences against him her self, and shewed the Errors that he had left in the Translation of the Books of Origen's Principles, as S. Jerom says Ep. 16.

John of Jerusalem having heard of this Judgment, writ him a very civil Letter, wherein after abundance of Commendations he spake in Ruffinus his behalf. Anastasius, having returned him thanks for his Complements, answered, That he could not but condemn Ruffinus his conduct, because he had translated the Books of Origen's Principles, with a design that the People should read them as Catholick Books; that the Fear he was in least they should corrupt the Doctrine of the faithful in his Church, obliged him to condemn them: that he was informed that the Emperours had made an Edict to forbid the reading of Origen's works: that Ruffinus having approved in his Translation the Opinions of Origen, deserved to be treated after the same manner, as he that first published them. Lastly, he declares, that he will hear no more of him; that he might seek for Absolution where he pleased, for his part he looked upon him as an excommunicated person.

This is the only true Letter of Anastasius, the two others are written by Isidore. The first di∣rected to the German and Burgundian Bishops is dated Fourteen years before Anastasius was Pope. Those of Burgundy to whom it is directed, were not then converted. It is made up of several passages of the Letters of Innocent, S. Leo and Flavianus, &c. It is full of Faults, and far from the Stile of the true Anastasius. The second addressed to Nectarius is dated Fourteen years after A∣nastasius his Death, and is taken out of Innocent, S. Leo, Gregory, &c.

We have not the first Synodical Letter of Anastasius, wherein he condemned Origen's Books, nor the Letter wherein he cited Ruffinus, nor that directed to Venerius of Milan, whereof he speaks in his Letter to John. It is believed, that he writ a Treatise of the Incarnation directed to Ursinus, whereof some Fragments are found at the latter end of Liberatus's Breviary. But it is certain, that they belong to Anastasius. This Pope died in the beginning of the Year 402 and left Innocent his Successor.

CHROMATIUS, Bishop of Aquileia.

CHROMATIUS, Bishop of Aquileia, whom S. Jerom in his Preface to the Chronicles, calleth the most Holy and Learned Bishop of his time, writ and preached several Sermons. There is * 1.71 but one Discourse of his extant upon the Beatitudes, upon Christ's Sermon on the Mount, and upon the words of S. John to Jesus Christ, I ought to be baptized of thee. Which probably is a Fragment of a Commentary, composed by this Saint upon the whole Gospel of S. Matt. He ex∣plaineth the Letter of the Gospel, insisting particularly upon the Moral Precepts thereof. In the Exposition of what the Gospel saith concerning Divorces, he seems to have believed, That a Man might Marry another Wife, after being divorced for the cause of Adultery, but he condemneth those that abandon their Wives upon any other Account, and Marry again, tho' he confesseth that humane Laws allowed it. He expounds the Lord's Prayer, and recommends the Exercise thereof, the Love of our Neighbour, Alms-deeds, Fasting, and other Vertues spoken of in Christ's Sermon upon the Mount. In the last Fragment he discourseth of the Efficacy of Christ's Bap∣tism.

The Stile of this Author is not very lofty, but his words are well chosen, his Notions just, his Expositions literal, and his Reflections useful. He was one of the most famous Bishops of the West, and held Correspondence with the Learnedest men of his time. He is one of the Three to whom

S. Chrysostom directed the Letter, to demand help of the Western Bishops: and he subscribed the Letters written for him to the East. His Works were printed by themselves at Basil in 1528. and at Lovain in 1548. and afterwards in the Bibliotheca Patrum: I say nothing of a Letter bearing the Name of Chromatius directed to S. Jerom, in which he desires to have the Martyrology of Eusebius; It being certain, that both this Letter and the pretended Answer of S. Jerom are spu∣rious, as Baronius evidently proves in the Seventh Chapter of his Preface to the Roman Mar∣tyrology.

GAUDENTIUS, Bishop of Brescia.

SAint Philastrius, Bishop of Brescia, who composed the Book of Heresies mentioned in the foregoing Century, dying in 386. in the Year 387, the Bishops of the Province, together with * 1.72 S. Ambrose, did, with the Consent of the people, chuse for his Successor Gaudentius, who was gone to travel in the East; But fearing, least he should abide in the East, dreading the Burden of the Episcopal Charge, they not only sent Deputies to him, with a Letter to desire his Return; but wrote a Letter besides to the Eastern Bishops to intreat them, that they would not admit him to the Communion, if he refused to come and govern the Diocess, of which he was cho∣sen Bishop. Whereby Gaudentius found himself obliged to accept of that Charge, and being come back, was ordained by S. Ambrose and the Bishops of his Province.

All these Circumstances are recorded in the Discourse which he made to them immediately af∣ter his Ordination. He was but young when they chose him, as he says in the same place. He was one of the Deputies sent to Constantinople in 404, or 405. by the Western Bishops, to de∣mand S. John Chrysostom's Re-establishment in his See. Possibly he lived a great while after∣wards.

To this Bishop is attributed the Life of his Predecessor S. Philastrius, which Surius Printed upon the Eighteenth day of July. Yet I cannot believe that it is certainly his; but we find in the Bibliotheca Patrum Nineteen Instructions, or Sermons, which are unquestionably Genuine, and which he collected himself, to send them to one Benevolus, one of the most considerable Men in Brescia; who had formerly been Receiver of the Emperor's Memorials, and Injunctions, and who had quitted that Employment, that he might not be obliged to doe any thing against his Conscience in obedience to the Empress Justina, who Countenanced the Arians, and persecuted S. Ambrose.

This Benevolus was constant at Divine Service, and heard the Sermons of Gaudentius with Plea∣sure; but having been hindred by Sickness from hearing those which this Holy Bishop preached at Easter, he prayed him to commit them to writing; and to Answer the desire of this Man, the Holy Bishop did write his Sermons almost in the same words that he preached them: He joyned to them four small Treatises upon some places of the Gospel, and a Fifth upon the Mar∣tyrdom of the Maccabees.

As to the other Sermons which the Copyers writ as Gaudentius was preaching, he will not own them for his, fearing that there may be some Errors in them; this Gaudentius de∣clares in the beginning of his Preface: Afterwards he comforts Benevolus in his Sickness, show∣ing that God permits often, Saints and righteous Men to be afflicted with Poverty and Sicknesses, whereas he lets the wicked enjoy a perfect Health and much Wealth, because both Punishments and Rewards are reserved to the Day of Judgment: that in the mean time he inflicteth visible Chastisements upon the impious and refractary, to frighten others by their Punishments: but permits likewise the righteous to be afflicted for Three Reasons, 1. to Correct, 2. to Purifie, and 3. to try them. The severity he useth towards them is a Fatherly severity. He sends them Afflictions, to manifest their Vertue both to Men and Angels, and so all the Sufferings of the righteous are either for their Profit, or for their Glory. Whosoever honoureth, and lo∣veth God truly, thinks himself Happy in the midst of Tribulations, and blesseth God for all that happeneth to him.

The first of those Sermons preached on Easter-Eve, is directed to the Catechumens that were to be baptized: He begins it with a thought that is rather subtle than solid, to give a Reason why Easter is celebrated in the Spring, after the ill Weather of Autumn, and the severity of Winter, and before the heat of Summer. It is, saith he, to show that Jesus Christ the Son of Righteousness, dissipates by his light the Darkness of Jewish Errors, and softens the hardness of the Heathens Hearts, preventing with his Beams, the hot Fire of the Judgment of the great Day. He adds, That the World having been created in the Spring, it is just that it should be repaired in the same Season. Afterwards he compareth the Christian's Passover with that of the Jews; and the deliverance of the People of Israel from Egypt thro' the Red Sea, with the Regeneration of Sinners, by the waters of Baptism.

The Second Sermon is directed to the Novices: Gaudentius expoundeth in that instruction the Mystery of the Eucharist, which was hid from them till that time. He compares it with the Jews Paschal Lamb, taking notice that That was but the Figure, and not the real thing.

Whereas in the truth of the New Law, it is the same Lamb dead for all; which being offered in all

Churches, nourishes under the Mystery of Bread and Wine, those that offer it, giveth life to them that have a lively Faith, and sanctifieth by Consecration those that consecrate the same. This is the Flesh of the Lamb, this is his Blood.... It is the same Lord Creator of all things, who having made Bread out of the Earth, forms his Body of this Bread, because he is able, and hath promised it. He who formerly changed Water into Wine, now changeth Wine into his Blood.

Having expounded thus plainly the Mystery of the Eucharist, he speaks of the Dis∣positions that Men ought to be in to come to it: He findeth them all represented by the Cere∣monies observed by the Jews in eating the Paschal Lamb; but his Similitudes are so far fetcht, that one would hardly have observed them. For who can believe that the Leathern Girdle that the Israelites were girded withall, was a Figure of the Mortification of Sins? Who would imagine, that when they are forbidden to break a bone of the Lamb, the meaning is that the Scripture∣precepts ought to be observed? And who can conclude from burning the remainders of the Lamb, that Men should consume by a lively Faith the doubts which they might have about the Eucharist. These Allegories, and such-like in this place, are something forced, and I question whether many people can relish them. At last he exhorteth the new baptized strongly to be∣lieve that Mystery, and giveth Two mystical Reasons why Jesus Christ chose Bread and Wine to be the matter of that Sacrament.

He prosecutes, in the Five following Sermons, his Lecture upon that place of Exodus, which speaketh of the Circumstances and Ceremonies wherewith the Jews offered the Paschal Lamb; and he applies them to the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ upon the Cross, and to what is done among Chri∣stians; and sometimes he draws from them some Moral instructions.

The Eighth and Ninth are upon the Gospel of the Marriage in Cana of Galilee; He commendeth Virginity, reproving those at the same time who condemn Matrimony, and warneth Parents, that though they may inspire into their Children the love of Virginity, yet they cannot enjoyn them the Vow of perpetual Continency. He maintains, that the Virgin Mary did not lose her Virgi∣nity in bringing Jesus Christ into the World. Both these Instructions are full of many Similitudes. He exhorteth the new baptized not to lose the Grace of their Baptism.

The Tenth Instruction is upon Exodus; There he brings many Allegories upon the Passover, and upon the Lord's Day. He seems to be perswaded, that the World shall end after the accom∣plishment of Six thousand Years; and that those Dead who appeared after Christ's death, were of the number of those Righteous ones, whom the Soul of Christ, that descended into Hell, deli∣vered in that day. These are the Ten Sermons which Gaudentius preached in Benevolus his ab∣sence during Easter Holy-days.

The other Sermons are particular Tracts which he collected to joyn them to the foregoing. The First is upon the Sick of the Palsie, whom Jesus Christ cured on the Sabbath-day. The Second is upon Christ's Words, John 12. And now is the judgment: Which he expoundeth thus: The World is going to judge its Creator and Master. The Third is upon the Nativity of Jesus Christ, and of that patience wherewith he endured Judas his Treason. Upon occasion of this unhappy Apostle's covetousness, he exhorteth to Alms-deeds, which he makes no scruple of comparing with Bap∣tism; saying, That as the Water of Baptism quenches Hell-fire, so abundance of Alms quenches the fire of Lust that remains after Baptism, or at least hinders it from breaking out into a Flame. He occasionally speaks by the bye against those who say they cannot fast, because they will not. He concludes with an Exhortation to love God and our Neighbour. This Sermon is better writ∣ten and more usefull than the others.

The Fourth is about the sending of the Holy Ghost, and contains a curious Observation against such as pretend to fathom Mysteries. We ought to believe that God is what he hath revealed him∣self to be; his Actions are not to be examined with a rebellious Spirit, but to be admired with Faith. and Submission: For the Word of God is direct, and all his Actions are for the exercise of our Faith.... And so let us have a care of assaulting, if we may so speak, the Divine Mysteries with injurious Questions. Neither Scrupulousness nor Curiosity will help us to discover them, but only make us lose the Faith which leads to Salvation and Eternal life.

The Fifth Sermon is in commendation of the Maccabees. Gaudentius endeavoureth to give reasons, Why Swine's flesh was forbidden to the Jews.

The Sixth Sermon is that which he preached at his Ordination in the presence of S. Ambrose and the other Bishops. He speaks at first of the Violence that was used towards him to make him accept the Bishoprick of Brescia. He commends his Predecessor Philastrius: He entreateth S. Am∣brose, the first of the Bishops there, to speak in the Name of all the Bishops, as S. Peter the Prince of the Apostles speaketh for them all. He ends, desiring the Bishops to implore God's mercy, that he would assist him with the Vertue of the Holy Ghost to govern his Diocess well.

The Seventh is a Panegyrick upon the Forty Martyrs, for whose honour they had built a Church, to deposit their Relicks. S. Gaudentius, who called many Bishops to that Feast, having spoken concerning the Relicks of several Martyrs, which he had gathered; viz. those of S. John Baptist, S. Andrew, S. Thomas, S. Luke, S. Gervasius, S. Protasius, S. Nazarius, and the Ashes of the SS. Sisinnius and Alexander, who had lately suffered Martyrdom: He adds, that Travelling through Cappadocia, he found at Caesarea a Convent of Women, where S. Basil's Nieces were, who were so kind as to give him part of the Relicks of the Forty Martyrs, left with them by their Uncle. He describeth afterwards those Saint's Martyrdom, taken out of S. Basil's discourse; then

he makes an end, saying, That the then consecrated Church being adorned with the Relicks of so many Saints, was to bear the Name of an Assembly of Saints.

The Eighth Discourse is a Letter to Germinius, wherein he explains the Parable of the Unjust Steward, related Luke 16. There he treateth chiefly of the Obligation to give Alms.

The Last Discourse is likewise a Letter to a Deacon called Paul, to expound that notable place of S. John's Gospel, which the Arians did alledge against the Divinity of Jesus Christ: My Father is greater than I. Gaudentius there refutes Arius and the Arians with great earnestness; af∣firming, that this place is to be understood of Christ's human Nature.

It is not necessary to give a Character of S. Gaudentius. He is sufficiently known by what we have said of him. His Style is plain and without affectation, full of forced Allegories, extraordi∣nary Notions, and far-fetcht Allusions. His Sermons are dry, barren, neither instructive nor mo∣ving in any considerable degree. In one word, they have not the strength, eloquence, beauty or exactness observed in the Sermons of those Greek Authors formerly mentioned.

JOHN of Jerusalem.

AFter the Death of S. Cyril, which happened in the Year 387, a Monk called John, a great Defender of Origen's Books, Opinions and Followers, succeeded in that See. S. Epipha∣nius * 1.73 being perswaded, that the Origenists were very dangerous Hereticks, reproved him before several persons for taking their part. But instead of yielding to S. Epiphanius's admonition, John declared himself openly against him, and upbraided him as a Patron of the An∣thropomorphites; that is, of those who affirmed that God had a Body. Soon after S. Epiphanius ordained Paulinianus, S. Jerom's Brother, out of his own Diocess, in that of Caesarea; and that gave John an occasion to complain of him, and to accuse him of violating the Canons. S. Epiphanius excused himself upon the account of the Custom of his Country; and observes in his Letter, that it was not this Ordination which most offended John, but that he was accused of being an Origenist. This Letter of S. Epiphanius was written in 392. S. Jerom was much engaged in the quarrel, and upholding S. Epiphanius's Party, was excommunicated of John, who used all his en∣deavours to expell him out of Palaestine. On the other side, Ruffinus took John's part; so that this quarrel betwixt two zealous Bishops, being fomented by these two learned Men, grew to a great heighth in a little time. Count Archelaus endeavoured to accommodate the matter; and as they accused one another of Heresie, it was agreed, That for their Reconciliation, they should make a Confession of Faith; but John appearing not in the Assembly called for that purpose, the Accommodation was broke off.

Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, informed of this Division, thought it his duty to endea∣vour to quiet it: Therefore he sent his Deacon Isidore for that end; who being already pre-possessed in Origen's behalf, strengthned John's Party, and returned without effecting any thing; and only brought Theophilus a Letter from John, wherein he justified himself, and accused S. Epi∣phanius. This Letter having been spread in the West, obliged both S. Jerom and S. Epiphanius to write to Theophilus, that he should make haste to declare against the Origenists. This Bishop deferr'd for some time to make this Declaration, suspecting that S. Epiphanius was guilty of the Anthropomorphites Error, which he abhorred. But he found himself obliged to declare himself of a Party, by the Secession of certain Monks of Egypt, infected with the Anthropomorphites Error; who af∣ter they had read a Letter of this Bishop against that Doctrine, came in great fury to Theophilus with a design to kill him. Theophilus to appease them, made use of Jacob's words to Esau, I see your faces as the face of God. This perswading the silly Monks, that his Mind was altered, and that he really believed that God had a face, they were quieted. But they being perswaded that Ori∣gen was the greatest enemy of the Doctrine which they maintained, said unto him; If you be of this mind, then condemn Origen's Books. This was the Reason (if we may believe the Historians of that time) for which Theophilus was forced to declare against that Author and his Party; at the time when Theophilus was fallen out with Isidore, the Long-brethren and the other Monks of Nitria. He accused them of Origenism, and forced them to retire to Constantinople. All this while John of Jerusalem continued in his Opinion, and writ a Letter in favour of Ruffinus and of Origen, to Pope Anastasius. His enmity against S. Jerom lasted long, as we learn by a Letter of Pope Innocent; and he joined himself to Pelagius, and caused him to be absolved in the Council of Diospolis, as appears by the Letter which S. Augustin wrote to him. He died in 416.

Gennadius saith that he writ a Book against his Adversaries; wherein he professed to admire the Wit, but not the Doctrine of Origen. That Discourse is lost.

There is attributed to this Author a Treatise dedicated to Caprasius of the Institution of Monke∣ry; but that visibly appears to be the work of a Latin Author, who composed it of purpose to prove, That the Order of the Carmelites, which began in the time of the Old Law, was very an∣cient in the Church, and that many Christians were of this Order in the Primitive Church. It is a heap of Fables, Visions and Dreams concerning Elias, and some other Prophets, whom this Author feigneth to have been Monks of Mount Carmel. But what is more surprizing, is, that upon occasion of this supposed Book, there was a Carmelite that either had so little sence him∣self,

or rather believed that others were so dull, as to attribute to the same Author several Books, which are either without the Name of an Author, or falsely ascribed to others; which he hath had the confidence to collect and publish at Bruxells in Folio, ann. 1643, under the Name of John of Jerusalem's Works; as if this pretended Author must necessarily be the Father of all these un∣known Children. But in one word; Though this famous * 1.74 Carmelite, who took the pains to col∣lect them, hath bestowed a whole Volume to shew that the Discourses contained in his First Vo∣lume, were truly written by John of Jerusalem, and hath endeavoured to justifie them from all sorts of Errors; yet one may say that he hath done nothing less than what he promiseth in the Title, and that he hath filled that long and tedious Treatise with idle Conjectures, groundless Suppositions, manifest Falshoods, or with Matters no ways pertinent to his Subject. So that this great Building failing at the foundation, is quickly fallen into ruine, and is become an object of Laughter to all persons that pretend to Learning.

THEOPHILUS of Alexandria.

THEOPHILUS was ordained Bishop in the Year 385, after the Death of Timotheus. We have already observed that he was a politick and daring Man. He took away the remains * 1.75 of Idolatry in the City of Alexandria, by causing the Temples and Idols that were left to be pulled down, and by discovering to the People the Frauds and the Stratagems which the Idol-priests made use of to uphold their Superstition; having hollow Statues wherein Men were hid, who perswaded the People that the Statues spoke.

This generous Action got Theophilus much credit and reputation, and gave him great power in Alexandria. The Council of Capua having referred to him the judgment of Flavian's business, he dealt very moderately with him; but he showed much partiality in the Ordination of S. Chry∣sostom; being desirous to have preferred Isidore to that See: However, they were friends in ap∣pearance for a while, and they united together to procure the Reconciliation of the Eastern with the Western Bishops. We have spoken before of his Carriage in the case of Origen, and the Ori∣genists, of the policy of his Conduct, and the passion which he shewed in the business of S. Chry∣sostom. There is no likelihood that he ever repented of the injustice and violence which he exer∣cised against S. John Chrysostom: For though S. John Damascene saith, that when he was near death, he caused the Image of that Saint to be brought to him; yet one cannot affirm it upon a testi∣mony of that nature, especially because S. Cyril his Successor, in the Church of Alexandria, per∣sisted after his death to refuse to pay any honour to the Memory of this Saint, and to insert his Name into the Diptychs. It is more likely, that what is related in the Lives of the Fathers in the Desert, is true; viz. That this Bishop, being at the point of yielding up the Ghost, and re∣flecting upon the long Penance of S. Arsenius, cried out; O how happy art thou Arsenius, to have always had this hour before thine eyes! Which sheweth, saith an Author of that time, that Monks who have quitted all the hopes of the World and of the Court, to mourn in the Wilderness, die more peaceably than the Archbishops that go out of their Dioceses, to disturb the peace of the Church by caballing at Court against the most innocent and holiest of their brethren. Yet S. Leo calls him Theo∣philus of happy Memory; not that he had an opinion of his Sanctity, but because dying in the Communion of the Church, that Title of Honour could not be denied him.

He wrote, saith Gennadius, a large Treatise against Origen, wherein he condemns both his Writings and his Person, showing at the same time that he was not the first that condemned him, but that he had been excommunicated by the Ancients, and particularly by Heraclas. He composed another Book against the Anthropomorphites, who hold that God hath an hu∣mane shape, and members like unto ours: Wherein he refuteth their Opinions, and convinceth them by testimonies of Holy Scripture; proving, that God is of an incorruptible and spiritual Nature; whereas all Creatures are in their Natures corruptible and subject to change.

He likewise presented to Theodosius the Emperour a small Treatise concerning Easter, where he fixes the Day, and time of the Moon when it ought to be celebrated, according to the decision of the Council of Nice, adding some Observations touching the Solemnity of that Festival. This Cycle began in the Year 380, and determined Easter Day for 100 Years consecutively, as S. Leo assures us in the 94th. and 95th. Letters of the new Edition.

Gennadius saith further, that he had read Three Books concerning Faith, that bore Theophilus his Name; but addeth, that he did not believe them to be his, because they are written in a dif∣ferent Style.

S. Jerom mentions Five Epistles of Theophilus, which he had translated into Latin. The First was a Synodical Letter against Origen of the Year 399. The Second was a Paschal Epistle for the Year 401, and three other Paschal Epistles for the Years 402, 403, and 404. We have not the Two first, the other Three are among S. Jerom's Epistles. The First is divided into four Parts, according to the Observation of that Saint. In the First Theophilus exhorts the Faithfull to celebrate the Feast of Easter worthily. In the Second and Third he speaks against Apollina∣rius. In the Last he adviseth Hereticks to repent. In all the Three he shews his aversion to Ori∣gen, accusing him with great vehemence, of several Errors. It is observed in the Last that the

Christians of that time forbore in Lent the Use of Wine and Meat. In these Discourses he inter∣sperses some Moral Notions, and endeth all his Epistles with giving notice of the Day when Lent shall begin, and of Easter Day and Whit-sunday.

We have besides, amongst S. Jerom's Epistles, Three Letters of Theophilus: One to S. Epipha∣nius, wherein he exhorts him to assemble a Council against Origen, and Two other Letters a∣gainst the Origenists.

There are some Greek Fragments of the Paschal Letters cited by Theodoret in the Council of Ephesus, and in that of Chalcedon, which are among those that we have, or else are taken out of other Letters of the same nature: For the Council of Ephesus quoteth a Sixth Paschal Letter; and Justinian in his writing against Origen, produces a great part of the Synodical Letter against Origen, and Two other fragments of a Letter, and of a Treatise directed to the Monks of Scheta.

Facundus, l. 6. ch. 5. quoteth a Book of Theophilus against S. Chrysostom, full of Invectives and Calumnies against that Saint whereof he gives some Instances, which shew how much Passi∣on and Rage had blinded him.

Lastly, One may see in Zonaras's and Balsamon's Collections some Laws and Canonical Letters of this same Bishop.

The First is a Pastoral Letter; wherein he saith; that when Christmas Eve happens upon a Sunday, some light Meat may be eaten, that so we may not seem to follow the practice of He∣reticks, by eating nothing on the Sunday, and yet not to break the Law of Fasting altogether.

The Second is a Letter containing some Rules for the Province of Lycopolis, directed to Am∣mon.

The First concerneth those who had communicated with the Arian Bishops; he ordereth that they should be deposed, allowing them still leave to dwell in the place, and to be dealt with as was appointed by the Bishops of Thebais.

The Second is upon the occasion of a Priest, who was ordained after he had committed a crime with a Woman that was divorced from her Husband. Theophilus determines that he ought to be Suspended from his Ministerial Function.

The Third is concerning a Priest who had been excommunicated by his Bishop. Theophilus de∣clares, that the Priest that was Excommunicated by his Bishop, ought to be esteemed Excom∣municate till he had justified himself by the Law.

The Fourth concerneth a Deacon, who was accused to have Married his Brother's Daughter. Theophilus saith, That if he Married her before Baptism, and had not co-habited with her since he was Baptized, he might continue in the Clergy; but if he had co-habited with her after Baptism, he ought to be degraded from the Clergy.

In the Fifth that relateth to an Accusation brought against a Reader, Theophilus gives this Or∣der; That if he be convicted of Fornication, he ought to be degraded; but if this Accusation is grounded only upon suspicion, no regard is to be had to it.

In the Sixth he sets down a Rule to be observed in Ordinations; he saith, That the Bishop is to Ordain none, who is not chosen by the whole Clergy in the presence of the People; and that the Bishop is to give his Approbation before he can be Ordained.

The Seventh appointeth, That whatsoever is left of the Offering after Communion, ought to be distributed to the Clerks, and to the Faithfull, and none of it to the Catechumens.

The Eighth is also concerning a Clerk that was accused of Fornication. Theophilus affirms, That if he be convicted of the Crime, he ought to be deposed; but if he gives a good account of his Behaviour, and it cannot be proved that he committed the Fact, they ought not to give him any trouble.

The Ninth Canon is about chusing a new Steward in the Church.

The Tenth enjoyns, That the Poor, the Widows and the Pilgrims should not be disturbed, and that none should usurp the Church-goods.

The Second Letter contains a Rule, whereby it is ordered conformably to the Canon of the Council of Nice, That the Novatians, who had a mind to come into the Church, might receive Ordination.

The Third to Agatho, was written upon occasion of a person, who knowing not the Laws of the Church, had contracted an unlawfull Marriage; and being censured for it, had left his Wife with her consent. He adviseth the Bishop to whom he writeth, to place them among the Cate∣chumens, if he thought fit, and if he judged that they did it sincerely; otherwise he will have him deal more severely with them.

The Last Letter is directed to Menna; where he forbids him to admit into the Communion of the Church, a Woman that had wrong'd another, before she had made reparation.

Theophilus hath nothing in his Writings that can turn to his Commendation: They are dark, unintelligible, full of false Reasonings and Reflections, that do not concern his Subject. He was a good Politician, but an ill Author. He knew better how to manage a Court-intrigue, than to resolve a question of Divinity. The only Rule of his Opinions was his Interest or his Ambition. He was ready to embrace any Opinion or Party that could satisfie his Passion, without examining much whether it was just or reasonable.

THEODORUS of Mopsuesta.

THEODORUS, a Priest of Antioch, Diodorus and Flavian's Disciple, S. Chrysostom's Com∣panion, and, as some have affirmed, Nestorius's Tutor, was chosen Bishop of Mopsuesta, * 1.76 about the beginning of the Fifth Century of the Church. Many were the Works that he writ; but the misfortune which they had to be condemned with his Person, in the Fifth Council, by the Intrigues of Justinian the Emperour, caused them to be lost, except the Titles and Fragments that were collected either by his Accusers, or by his Defenders.

It is probable that he writ Commentaries upon the whole Bible: Photius, Vol. 25th. of his Bi∣bliotheca, saith, That he had read a Commentary of Theodorus upon Genesis, divided into Seven Parts. Facundus and the Fifth General Council mention Commentaries of Theodorus upon the Psalms, the Book of Job, the Canticles, the Twelve lesser Prophets, the Gospels of S. Matthew, S. John and S. Luke, upon the Acts, the Epistle to the Romans, and upon the Epistle to the He∣brews. In these Commentaries he insisted most upon the Historical sence, avoiding all Allego∣ries: He writ a Book likewise to justifie that way of expounding the Scripture, intituled, Of Al∣legory and of History against Origen, quoted by Facundus. Photius observeth further, That Theo∣dorus's Commentaries are full of frequent Repetitions; that they are tedious, and unpleasant to read. The first of his Commentaries is that upon the Psalms; he saith himself, that it was the most imperfect and least exact. In his Commentary upon Job, he says, That though the Hi∣story of Job be true at the bottom, yet it is written in a fabulous way: He observeth besides, when he Comments upon the Book of Canticles, that it is a difficult thing to write an usefull Commentary upon that Book; and that it was forbidden both among the Jews, and among the Christians to read it publickly, since in all probability it was a Nuptial Song, though it is to be understood of the Love of Wisdom.

The other Treatises of this Author were very long, and very numerous: When he was young he composed a large Work of the Incarnation against the Apollinarists and Anomaeans, divided in∣to Fifteen Books, which, according to his own Testimony, contain'd above Fifteen Thousand Verses; wherein he shewed, saith Gennadius, by convincing proofs; and by testimonies of the Scrip∣ture, (for he speaketh of Theodorus, in the 12th. Chapter of his Book, concerning Ecclesiastical Writers,) That in Jesus Christ there is the fullness both of the Divinity and of the Humanity; That Man is made of two Substances, the Soul and the Body; That Sense and Understanding are not separate Substances, but Faculties of the Soul. The Fourteenth Book is concerning the Trinity: But in discoursing of uncreated Nature, he treateth also of Creatures. The Last Book contains many Quo∣tations out of the Fathers, to confirm his Doctrine by the Authority of Tradition. Some considerable Fragments of this Treatise of the Incarnation are cited by Facundus, and in the Fifth Council.

He wrote besides Five and Twenty Books against Eunomius, in defence of S. Basil's Books, men∣tioned by Photius in the 25th. Volume of his Bibliotheca; some whereof are cited by Facundus, and in the Fifth Council: Four Books against Apollinarius; A Book intituled The mystical Book▪ A Treatise to those that had been Baptized; Two Letters to Artemius of Alexandria; An Epi∣stle to Cerdo upon the Interpretation of the Psalms; Five Books of the Creature; Five other Books to show that God permitted Sin, because it is for Men's advantage; which are all cited by Facundus, and in the Fifth Council; And Three Books of the Magick of the Persians, directed to a Suffragan Bishop of Armenia, mentioned by Photius in the 81st. Volume of his Bibliotheca; where he saith, That Theodorus in the First of those Three Books, explains that abominable Axiom of the Persians, introduced by Zarades; whereby Zarovas, the God of Fortune, for the first principle of all things, from whom they suppose Oromazus to be descended, by whom they mean the Evil Genius or Satan; That when he had given an account of that Doctrine, which was as base as it is impious; he refuteth it in the same Book. In the Two last Books he treateth of the True Religion; and having begun with the World's Creation, he falls insensibly upon the Law of Grace.

The Fifth Council attributes to Theodorus of Mopsuesta, Charisius's Creed that was produced in the Council of Ephesus: But Facundus says, That it was none of his, and that it was an injury to him to ascribe it to him.

Theodorus of Mopsuesta was charged with several Heresies after his Death; and particularly, that he was Nestorius's Tutor; and that he taught in his Writings those Errors, which since bear the Name of that Heresiarch. This personal Accusation occasioned a great Contest, that was agitated with much heat in the beginning of the Sixth Century. Justinian caused this Author to be con∣demned in the Fifth General Council, in despite of Vigilius, who defended him. He would have obliged all the Bishops to subscribe that Condemnation; but some refused to doe it, and undertook to plead for Theodorus. Facundus, Bishop of Hermiana, a City in Africa, proved one of his most zealous Defenders, and composed Twelve Apologetical Books for him; wherein he endeavoureth to justifie him fully of all the Accusations that were formed against him. This is not a fit place to examine that Question, which we shall handle at large hereafter, when we come to speak of the Fifth Council, and of Facundus's Books: And so instead of examining the Doctrine of

Theodorus Mopsuestenus, I shall only give some Remarks upon his Style and way of Writing▪ His Style, if Photius may be credited, is neither lofty nor clear; he is full of tedious Repetitions, but he brings strong Proofs, and hath the Scriptures very ready at command: This judgment of Photius is confirmed by the Fragments of his Writings that are extant: His Style is perplexed and diffuse, no clearness in it, but the Notions are solid and exact enough: He thought and spoke with ease: He despised allegorical and mystical Interpretations of Scripture; but insisted much upon Moral Heads, and made it his main business to set forth the History, and expound the Prophecies.

Here is a Catalogue of the Latin Fragments of this Author, set down in the Fifth General Council; and by Facundus, which may be consulted to judge both of his Doctrine and of his Style.

WORKS of THEODORUS of Mopsuesta, cited by Facundus, by the Fifth Council, col. 4. by Photius and Gennadius.

Commentaries upon the Holy Scripture.

• SEven Volumes upon Genesis, 5. Conc. collat. 4. cap. 62. Photius cod. 25.
• Upon the Psalms, Facund. l. 9. c. 1. p. 131, 132. l. 6. cap. 3. 5. Conc. c. 19. 23, 24.
• Upon Job, 5. Concil. c. 63, 64, 65, 66, 67.
• Upon the Canticles, 5. Concil. cap. 68, 69, 70, 71.
• Upon the Twelve minor Prophets, Conc. 5. cap. 20, 21, 22.
• Upon S. Matthew, Facund. l. 3. c. 4. p. 43. l. 9. c. 2. p. 132. Concil. 5. cap. 26. 40, 51, 52, 55.
• Upon S. Luke, Conc. 5. c. 58.
• Upon S. John, Facund. l. 9. c. 3. p. 135. Conc. 5. c. 13, 14, 15, 33, 34.
• Upon the Acts, Conc. 5. c. 16.
• Upon the Epistle to the Romans, l. 6. c. 3. p. 46.
• Upon the Epistle to the Hebrews, Conc. 5. c. 32, 46.

Treatises against Hereticks.

• THree Books of the Magick of the Persians, Photius, cod. 81.
• Fifteen Books of the Incarnation. The 13th. is cited by Facund. l. 3. c. 2. p. 38. The 5th. the 6th. the 10th. the 12th. the 15th. l. 9. c. 3. p. 135, 136, 137, 138, 139. They are all cited l. 10. c. 1, &c. The 6th. p. 149. and 159. The 14th. is cited Conc. 5. c. 17. 54. The 1st. c. 25. c. 27. The 8th. c. 29. the 7th. c. 30. the 12th. c. 43, 47, 48. The 2d. cap. 49, 50. The 13th. in the 53. Gennad. c. 12.
• Twenty-five Books against Eunomius. The 10th. is cited by Facund. l. 9. c. 3. p. 139. Photius, cod. 4.
• Four Books against Apollinarius. The 3d. is cited by Facundus, l. 3. c. 2. p. 37. Conc. 5. c. 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 12. The 1st. is cited, l. 10. c. 1. p. 149. The 4th. is cited Conc. 5. c. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.
• Five Books of the Creature, Conc. 5. c. 56. and 61.
• Five Books concerning God's permitting Sin, Conc. 5. c. 57, 58, 59, 60.
• A Treatise to those who were to be baptized. Facund. l. 9. c. 3. p. 135. Conc. 5. c. 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42.
• A Mystical Book, Fac. l. 3. p. 37. citeth the 13th. Book of this Work.
• A Treatise of History and Allegory against Origen. Fac. l. 3. c. 5. p. 46.
• Two Letters to Artemius, Fac. l. 3. c. 5. p. 45.
• A Letter to Cerdon. Fac. l. 1. c. 1. p. 150.
• Symbolum Charisii, Act. 6. Synodi Ephes. Fac. l. 3. c. 2. and 5. p. 39, and 44. Conc. 5. Act. 4.

PALLADIUS.

PALLADIUS, Originally of Galatia, Evagrius his Disciple, left his Country at Twenty Years of Age, in the Year 388 a 1.77, and went into Egypt, to learn of the Monks of that place the Exercises of the Monastick life. Being arrived at Alexandria, he addressed him∣self * 1.78 to Isidore to be advised by him; who committed him to the Conduct of a Monk, who lived in a Cave near Alexandria. But Palladius not being able to undergo the Austerities practised by that Monk, was forced to leave him; but nevertheless he continued three Years in the Monasteries about Alexandria: afterwards he undertook to visit those of Nitria and Thebais, and he stay'd a great while in those solitary places: But falling sick of a dangerous Distemper, he returned to Alexandria, and put himself into the hands of the Physicians there, who advised him to go into Palaestine, where the Air might agree with him better. From Palestine he came to Bithynia, where he was ordained Bishop of Helenopolis in 401. Being one of S. Chrysostom's Friends, when that Saint was condemned, he was obliged to retire to the West, and returning to the East with the Deputies of the Western Bishops, he was put into Prison, and fent back with them. From the Bishoprick of Helenopolis, he was translated to that of Aspuna b 1.79; a City of Galatia under the Metropolitan of Ancyra. He was Ruffinus his Friend, and defended Origen, sided with Pelagius, and opposed S. Jerom. He writ in the Year 421. an History of the Life, Actions, Mi∣racles, and Discourses, of the holiest Monks that he had seen in Egypt, Libya, Thebais, and Palae∣stine. It is Dedicated to one Lausus, wherefore it has had the Name of Historia Lausiaca. This Relation, (as most other Works of this Nature) contains many extraordinary things. Among several Examples of sound Vertue, and useful Reflections, one may find childish Sentences, Ex∣amples dangerous to be followed, enormous Austerities, unreasonable Practices, and rash Under∣takings: The Stile of this History is flat, a meer Relation without Ornament or Order; it was Printed in Latin, in the Lives of the Fathers by Rosweidus, and in the Bibliotheca Patrum: The Greek was published by Meursius, and Printed at Amsterdam in the Year 1616. It is Prin∣ted likewise in Greek and Latin, in the Supplement to the Bibliotheca Patrum, in 1624. Cotelerius added some Greek Supplements in the last Volume of the Monuments of the Greek Church, Pag. 117, 158.

This same Palladius is thought to be the Author of S. Chrysostom's Life, and it is very likely. For, 1. The Stile of that work is like that of the Historia Lausiaca. 2. Palladius Author of the Historia Lausiaca was S. Chrysostom's Friend, and persecuted upon his Account. 3. It is certain, that the Author of S. Chrysostom's Life was called Palladius, and that he lived in the beginning of the Fifth Century. But there is no Palladius. known besides this. 4. It is manifest, that the Writer of S. Chrysostom's Life, was of the same party, and in the same Interest and Sentiments with Palladius of Helenopolis. 5. The Author of S. Chrysostom's Life is called Bishop of Heleno∣polis, in a Greek Catalogue of the Authors, that wrote S. Chrysostom's Life mentioned by Sir Henry Savile. The Greek Title of that Dialogue in the Florence Manuscript, which is Six hundred years old, beareth the Name of Palladius of Helenopolis; and it is observed in the Margin, that he was Bishop of Aspuna. Lastly, Diodorus of Trimithus saith, That the Author of S. Chryso∣stom's Life was Bishop in Bithynia. Yet some Conjectures seem to prove, that Palladius Author of S. Chrysostom's Life, and Paladius of Helenopolis are two different Persons: For, 1. The Wri∣ter of S. Chrysostom's Life speaks of the Voyage of Palladius of Helenopolis to Rome, as preceding his. 2. He speaks as if he writ the Dialogue which relates that Life, whilst Palladius of Hele∣nopolis was detained Prisoner in the East: Lastly, Palladius of Helenopolis was but Thirty nine years old when S. Chrysostom died, whereas the Author of the Dialogue makes Theodorus speak of him as of an ancient Bishop. These Reasons perswaded Bigotius, that Palladius Author of that Dialogue, was not Palladius. Disciple to Evagrius. Yet it is easie to Answer; That Palla∣dius feigned these things, after the Custom of Dialogists, perhaps to hide himself the better, being unwilling to be known to be the Author of that Treatise. However, this History is composed in the form of a Dialogue held at Rome, betwixt Theodorus Deacon of Rome and Bishop Palla∣dius. It contains S. Chrysostom's Condemnation, the History of his Life, and a Justification of the Accusations that were brought against him. It is written with great Plainness, but with much Exactness and Truth. It was formerly translated by Ambrosius Camaldulensis, but his Version was not sincere. Bigotius having since found a Manuscript in the Library of Florence, which contained the Greek Original of that Dialogue, caused it to be Printed, with a new Version on the side, composed with all the Fidelity and Exactness that can be expected from so able a Man. This Volume is Printed in Quarto at Paris by Martin, Ann. 1680.

P. INNOCENT I.

POpe Innocent succeeded to Pope Anastasius in the Year 402. and governed the Church of Rome till 417. This Pope being consulted from all parts, upon divers Questions, both of * 1.80 Doctrine and of Discipline, was put upon writing of Letters, which conte•…•… very useful Rules and most judicious Decisions.

The first Letter, which should have been one of the last, since it was not written before 416. is an Answer to Decentius Bishop of Eugubium a City of Umbria in Italy, upon several Questions put to him by that Bishop.

The Preface of that Epistle, setteth forth the advantage of the City of Rome. He pretends that if all Churches had held the Practices which they received from the Apostles, they had all agreed in the same Discipline, and that all the difference, which so much scandalizeth the People, is caused by the Deviation from the Apostles Tradition. Upon this Principle he concludes, That they ought every where to observe the Discipline which Rome received of S. Peter, and which it hath always kept.

Especially, saith he, because it is evident, that the Churches of Italy, Gaul, Spain, Africa, Sicily, and other Islands that are between Italy and Africa, have been setled by the Bishops whom S. Peter or his Successors sent thither.

Tho' this Pope lays down these Maxims as indubitable, yet are they not without Difficulty; and it would have been hard for him to have proved them well: for what Evidence is there to justifie, that the Apostles setled all Points of Discipline themselves? and how can we know that they established them all after the same manner? On the contrary is it not certain, that S. John cele∣brated the Feast of Easter in the East, upon other days than Sundays, tho' probably both S. Peter and S. Paul did the contrary at Rome? And had the Apostles setled the same Usages, and Ceremonies in all the Churches which they founded, would it therefore follow, that there is a necessity of observing them? Do not all Men know, that Discipline may and is to alter accord∣ing to the various Circumstances of time? And what Proof is there, that the Church of Rome hath preserved the Discipline setled by S. Peter, better than other Churches have kept that which was given them by other Apostles their Founders. Is there any certainty that the Churches of France, Spain, and Africa, were all founded by those whom S. Peter, or his Successors sent thi∣ther? And Lastly, where is the necessity to oblige them all to change their Rites and Customs, to embrace those of the Church of Rome? Many such Queries may be made upon this Principle of Pope Innocent, which could not easily be resolved. But an Italian Bishop his Suffragan, could not in reason propose such Difficulties; he ought to conform to the Discipline of his Metropolis. He had often been at Rome, and present at the publick Service, and so might well be acquainted with the Ceremonies practised there. That was sufficient to instruct, and oblige him to reform the Abuses of his own Church: Yet he advised with Pope Innocent; and the Pope thought fit to make him an Answer, not so much to instruct him, as to teach, advise, and reprove with the greater Authority those that receded from the Customs of the Church of Rome, and even to im∣pose them if they would not yield to his Admonitions.

In the first Canon he declares, That the Blessing is not to be given before the Consecration of the Holy Mysteries; That so it may be as a Sign and Token, that the People approve of the Consecration of the Mysteries.

The Second enjoyns that those who are to be recommended in the Service of the Eucharist be not named, before Their offering be presented.

The Third forbids Priests to confirm Children, because they have not the Soveraignty of the Priesthood: That they may Baptize, and Anoint the baptized with the Oyl that is con∣secrated by the Bishop, but not lay it upon their Foreheads; because this is allowed to none but Bishops, when they conferr the Holy Ghost: He declares that he cannot recite the words, for fear of discovering the Mysteries, if he would answer the advice that was required of him.

In the Fourth Canon he pretends to give an evident Reason of the Saturday's Fast, by saying, that as all Sundays are kept with joy in remembrance of the Resurrection, and as they fast every Friday, because of the Passion of Jesus Christ. So they should fast likewise upon Saturday, as being between the day of sorrow and that of rejoycing, and the rather because the Apostles mourned all that day. In a word, that since holy Saturday is a Fasting day, all other Sa∣turdays should be such in remembrance of that Day. He observeth that in his time the Divine Mysteries were not celebrated either upon Fridays or Saturdays.

The Fifth Canon is obscure enough. S. Innocent saith there, that it was to no purpose for De∣centius to consult him concerning the leavened Bread, which the Bishop of Rome sent every Sun∣day to the Parish-Priests in the City of Rome, after he had consecrated it, because his Custom could not concern the Countrey Parishes, for as much as the Sacraments ought not to be carried far, quia non longe portanda sunt Sacramenta: Wherefore, addeth he, we do not send them to Priests in distant Parishes, because they have Power to consecrate.

The Sixth declares, that a Priest may not lay hands upon an Energumen, without leave from the Bishop, but that he may if the Bishop gives him Commission to doe it.

In the Seventh it is enjoyned, that those who have done Penance should be reconciled upon Holy Thursday, whether they were Guilty of great Crimes, or of lesser Offences, except some * 1.81 Distemper requireth another time: And to judge of Repentance, regard must be had to the Pains, mourning and tears of the Penitent, and his Sin must be remitted, if it appears that he hath made a proportionable satisfaction.

The Eighth is about the Anointing of the Sick, spoken of in the Epistle of S. James. Innocent saith, that the words of the Apostle are without Question to be understood of the Sick that are faithful, that these may be Anointed with the Oyl that is consecrated by the Bishop, and the use of this is not peculiar to Priests only, but all Christians may anoint themselves, and those that belong to them in Case of necessity: that it is not necessary that the Bishop should make this Unction; that it should not be administred to Penitents, because it is a kind of Sacrament, and since other Sacra∣ments are denied, they have no right to this.

He concludeth with an Exhortation to Decentius, that he should cause the Discipline of the Church of Rome to be observed in his Church, and to instruct the Priests and Clerks under his Care well, that so they might discharge their Ministry worthily.

The Second Letter was written in 404. to Victricius Bishop of Rouen, who likewise asked Questions about points of Discipline. It begins also with the Praises of the Roman Discipline; he exhorts him to send this Letter to his Brethren, that they might learn what Rules they were to follow.

This Preface is followed by Thirteen Canons.

The First agreeable to the Decision of the Council of Nice, forbids a Bishop to be ordained without the Consent of the Metropolitan of the Province: declaring farther, that one Bishop a∣lone cannot Ordain.

The Second prohibits the admitting of those into the Clergy, that have been Soldiers after they were baptized.

The Third allows a Synod of the provincial Bishops to take Cognizance of all Causes relating to the Persons of Clerks and Bishops, according to the Decree of the Nicene Council; but he addeth, Yet without prejudice to the Rights of the Roman Church, to which great regard is to be had in all Causes. And if they be Causae Majores, devolved to the Holy See, they are not to be brought hither nor judged; before Judgment is given by the Bishops of the Province.

The Fourth forbids to admit into Orders, a Person that has married a Widow, or a Woman that is divorced from her Husband.

The Fifth extends this Prohibition, even to those that have married such a Woman before Baptism.

He confirmeth the same Law in the Sixth, with respect to those that have been twice married.

The Seventh forbids Bishops to ordain Clerks of the faithful of another Church, except the Bishop of that Church permits it.

The Eighth ordaineth, that the Novatians and Donatists be received by the sole Imposition of hands; because that tho' they were baptized by Hereticks, yet were they baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ. He addeth, That if any Catholicks being entred into their Sect, were baptized, and are willing to return to the Bosom of the Chuch, they must be put to a long Penance, be∣fore they be admitted.

The Ninth is concerning the Celibacy of Priests and Deacons.

The Tenth forbids the Monks that were ordained Clerks, to leave their way of living.

In the Eleventh, the Officers of the Emperor, and such as are in publick Employments, are not to be admitted into Orders.

The Twelfth prohibits the admitting of those Virgins that being solemnly consecrated to God, Married, or were corrupted, to Penance, before the Death of the person with whom they have committed the Crime, For, saith he, if a Woman, who during the Life of her Husband marrieth another is an Adulteress, and is not admitted to do Penance before the Death of one of them, with how much more reason should the same rigour be observed towards her, who being united to an im∣mortal Husband, went over to an humane Marriage?

The Thirteenth enjoyns a Penance of some time to the Virgins that Marry, after promising Vir∣ginity, tho' they had not solemnly been veiled by the Bishop.

Pope Innocent finishes his Letter, saying, that if these Canons were observed by the Bishops, there would be no more Ambition among them, Divisions would cease, Schisms, and Heresies would be stifled, and the Devil would have no occasion to assault the Flock of Jesus Christ, &c.

The Third Epistle of the same Nature with the two former, is written in 405. to Exuperius Bishop of Tholouse.

In the First Canon of this Letter, he confirms Siricius his Law concerning the Celibacy Priests and Deacons; yet he forgiveth those who thro' Ignorance observed it not, upon condition that they shall continue in that Order, and not be admitted to an higher. But he ordains that those should be degraded who violated it knowingly.

The Second Canon relates to Sinners, who stay till the hour of Death to desire Penance: Pope Innocent saith, that they were dealt withal after two different manners. That the ancient Disci∣pline was more severe, because Penance was granted them without allowing them the Commu∣nion: but in his time, it was administred to dying Men, that they might not imitate the hard∣ness

of Novatian. These last words with several others that are in the Text of that Canon, ma∣nifest that by the word Communion, is not to be understood the Administration of the Eucharist: but Absolution.

The Third Canon exempts those from Penance, that condemned any Persons to Death, who put any to the Rack, or were obliged by their Office to condemn the guilty to any Punishment, because the civil Powers, saith this Pope, are established by God for the Punishment of Criminals.

The Fourth Canon gives a Reason why more Women do Penance for Adultery than Men. Pope Innocent saith, That the Christian Religion punisheth this Sin equally both in Men and Wo∣men, but Wives not being able to accuse their Husbands of this Crime, the Bishop cannot pass Judgment upon secret Sins, whereas Husbands do more freely accuse their Wives, and discover them to the Priests.

The Fifth excuses those who by their Office are obliged to demand the Death of a Criminal, or to condemn him.

The Sixth ordaineth, that those should be put out of the Church, both Men and Women, that Marry again after a Divorce; but this penalty is not to extend to their Kindred and Allies, except they contributed to that forbidden Marriage.

The last Canon contains a Catalogue of the Sacred Books, comprehending all the Books both of the Old and of the New Testament, which we now own for Canonical: He rejects the Acts pub∣lished under the Names of S. Matthias, S. James the Less, S. Peter and S. John, S. Andrew, S. Tho∣mas, and such-like.

The Fourth Letter, without Date, is directed to Felix, Bishop of Nuceria. Having com∣mended that Bishop for asking his advice about some Doubts; he tells him in the First Canon, That those are not to be admitted into Orders, who voluntarily have dismembred themselves. In the Second, That it is forbidden to Ordain such as have been married twice, or have married Widows. In the Third, That those must not be Ordained that have been Soldiers; that have pleaded at the Bar, or have born Offices at Court. In the Fourth, That those of the Laity are to be chosen, who are Baptized, of approved Morals, who have spent their Time with Clerks, or in Monasteries, and who have kept no Concubines. Lastly, in the Sixth, he commands the Ob∣servation of the Interstitia; [i. e. the Times between every Ordination, upon any promotion from lesser to higher Orders,] that they Ordain no Man a Reader, an Acolyth, a Deacon or a Priest of a sudden; that so having been long in the inferiour Degrees, his Behaviour and Conduct may be tried.

In the Fifth Letter, directed to Two Bishops of Abruzzo, he bids them depose the Priests that were accused of having had Children since their Ordination, if they be convicted of that crime: He observes in the beginning, that a Bishop ought not to be ignorant of the Canons.

The Sixth is to some Bishops of Apulia: He enjoyns One Bishop to be deposed, though he had done publick Penance: He reproacheth them with allowing many things to be done in their Province contrary to the Canons, which might easily have been corrected, if Bishops themselves were not Authors of such Disorders.

The Seventh is directed to the Bishops of Macedonia about Two Bishops, Bubalius and Tauria∣nus, who had caused the Judgment that was given against them to be re-viewed again, and falsely boasted of having a Letter from P. Innocent, written in their behalf.

In the Eighth he exhorteth Florentius, Bishop of Tivoli, to restore to his Brother Bishop a Pa∣rish which he had taken from him.

The Ninth declareth, That a Man who married another Woman, while his Wife was in cap∣tivity, ought to return to the former; because a Second Marriage cannot be lawfull, except the former Wife be dead, or separated by Divorce.

The Tenth is a Letter of Complement to Aurelius and S. Augustin.

The Eleventh to Aurelius is touching the determining of Easter-Day the following Year.

The Twelfth directed to the same, is upon the choice which they should make of Bishops; he will have them to be chosen from the Clergy, and not from the Laity.

The Thirteenth is to Juliana, a Lady, whose Devotion he commendeth.

The Fourteenth to Bonifacius, and those that follow, were written Anno 413, after Alexander, Bishop of Antioch, had inserted again the Name of S. Chrysostom into the Diptychs. Innocent writeth to Bonifacius, that he had admitted that Bishop to his Communion, upon condition that he should not disturb those that were Ordained by Evagrius, and that he should put S. Chry∣sostom's Name among those Bishops whose Memory was celebrated.

The Fifteenth is directed to Alexander, Bishop of Antioch; wherein he congratulates their Reconciliation.

In the Sixteenth to Maximianus, he saith, that he had not yet communicated with Atticus of Constantinople, because he had not performed the Conditions, without which there could be no peace.

The Seventeenth subscribed by Twenty Italian Bishops, is directed to the same Evagrius, whom he commendeth for re-uniting the remainders of Paulinus and Evagrius's Party.

The Eighteenth to the same, consists of Three Canons; in the first, he extolleth the Dignity of the Church of Antioch, that he may magnifie that of Rome the more; saying, That according to the Authority of the Council of Nice, which gives the Sense of all the Bishops in the World,

the Church of Antioch had Jurisdiction over a whole Diocess; That this Authority was not granted to it, because of the greatness of the City of Antioch, but because it had been the first Seat of S. Peter; And that it deserved that the most solemn Assembly of the Apostles should be made there: So that it had not given place to the Church of Rome; but only for this reason, That the latter had the End and Consummation of that which the former had but an occasional enjoy∣ment of: And by reason of this Dignity, he tells the Bishop of Antioch, That as he Ordaineth the Metropolitans by an Authority peculiar to him, he ought not to suffer that other Bishops should be Ordained without his leave and consent, by writing to the Bishops that are afar off, and causing them that are near to come to him for Ordination.

In the second Canon he saith, That two Bishops are not to be made Metropolitans, when Towns are newly erected into Metropoles at the same time, upon the dividing of a Province into Two by the Emperour. He speaketh afterwards against the Custom of the Bishops of the Isle of Cyprus, who ordained Bishops without consulting with the Bishop of Antioch.

In the Last he affirms, That the Arians returning to the Church, are to be admitted with im∣position of hands; but their Clergy are not permitted to continue in the Ministry of the Church.

The Nineteenth, directed to Acacius of Beraea, is upon the Reconciliation with Alexander of Antioch.

In the Twentieth, he writes to Lucianus, Bishop of Signi, to stop some Meetings of the Photi∣nians in his Diocess.

The Twenty-first, directed to Martinianus, a Bishop in Macedonia, is written from Ravenna. He writeth to that Bishop, that he should not refuse his Communion to some Clerks, who were Ordained by Bonosus, but had abjured his Error. He saith, that he had already written a Letter to Rufus, and other Bishops of Macedonia; wherein he gave his judgment, That they were to be received to the Communion, and left in possession of their Churches.

This Letter is probably the Two and Twentieth, which consequently ought to be set before the foregoing; it beareth date from the Year 414, and is directed to Rufus and other Bishops of Ma∣cedonia. He tells them in the beginning, that he was much surprized by a Letter directed to the See of Rome, as the chiefest of all Churches, because they consulted him about things that had no difficulty; and concerning which, he had plainly declared his Opinion. One of those things is the Ordination of such as had married Widows. P. Innocent saith, That there is no dispute that they should not be Ordained; and affirms, that it was the practice of all, both Eastern and We∣stern Churches; Nay, he would have those to be degraded, who are found to be in Orders. The Second is concerning those, who having lost a former Wife, being yet unbaptized, had mar∣ried a Second after Baptism. Some were of opinion, that this kind of Bigamy did not hinder them from being admitted into Sacred Orders. P. Innocent alledgeth several Reasons to prove that such a practice is not to be followed.

The Third Rule is touching the Ordinations by Hereticks. P. Innocent scruples not to alledge the same passages, and the same expressions, used by S. Cyprian, to prove the invalidity of their Baptism, to show the nullity of their Ordination: For he saith, That as many as are thus Or∣dained, having their Heads wounded with the Imposition of Heretical Hands, had need of Pe∣nance for their remedy; and that such as need Penance, ought not to be Ordained: That Here∣ticks having not true Orders, cannot conferr Orders: That they cannot make those on whom they lay their Hands, partakers of any thing but of the Condemnation that themselves are sub∣ject to. After this Observation, he refutes the false Principle of such as believed, that a lawfull Bishop's Ordination remitted all Sins. He saith, that the custom of his Church was, to grant Lay-communion, after a single Imposition of Hands, to those who, having been baptized by He∣reticks, desired to enter into the Church; but that those were obliged to doe Penance, who re∣turned to the bosom of the Church, after they had quitted it, to enter into a Sect of Hereticks. He blameth those who not only doe not put them under Penance, but also suffer them to con∣tinue in their Ministery.

Afterwards he frames some Objections against this Rule. The First is the Law made by Any∣sius, concerning those whom Bonosus Ordained; whereby he permitted, that they should be re∣ceived into the Church with their Orders. P. Innocent answers, That this example is of no con∣sequence, because they made use of this Condescension in favour of those that were Ordained by Bonosus, to prevent several Bishops from persisting to follow his Party. That this particular Exi∣gency of the Church obliged them to transgress the Rules; but when the Necessity ceaseth, they ought to return to the Law.

The Second Objection is grounded upon the Canon of the Council of Nice, which permits the receiving of the Novatians. P. Innocent saith, That this Canon relates to Novatians only, and is not to be extended to other Hereticks. He adds, That in this Canon the business is about Baptism; and that the Council ordains that the Paulianists should be re-baptized, because they baptized not in the Name of the Holy Trinity; whereas the Novatians baptized as the Catholicks did, in the Name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. And Lastly, He declareth that this Rule concerneth those that were baptized by Hereticks; but as to those who were bapti∣zed in the Church, and embraced an Heretical Sect, if they recover from their Apostasie, they ought undoubtedly to be put to publick Penance; and having done Penance, they can never

come into the Clergy. Whence he concludes, That those who left the Church after Bonosus was condemned, to joyn with him, and received Orders from Hereticks, are not to keep their Digni∣ty, nor to be Ordained, when they return again to the Church. Wherefore he exhorteth the Macedonian Bishops to reform that abuse; telling them, That they ought not to allow that in time of Peace, which Necessity commanded to be done in time of Trouble; That it often hap∣pens that a fault remains unpunished, because a whole People is guilty of it. Upon such occasi∣ons, what is past must be left to God's Judgment, and care must be taken to prevent the like disorders for the time to come. All this is the consequence of the same Third Canon, though it be divided into Four.

The Last Canon is concerning a Bishop, one Photinus, who had been condemned by the See of Rome with too much rigour. P. Innocent approves of the Admonition of the Macedonian Bi∣shops; but saith, That the See of Rome was mis-informed and deceived by the Calumnies of his Enemies. He owns him for a Bishop, and commends the others for informing him better, and desireth them to shew kindness to a Deacon called Eustathius.

The Twenty-third Letter is directed to the Spanish Bishops that were assembled in Council at Toledo. It is about particular affairs of the Churches in that Kingdom. The First Canon takes notice of a kind of Schism among the Bishops of Boetica, and of other Spanish Provinces, who had given the Communion to those of Gallicia. P. Innocent proves that Lucifer's Severity was not to be imitated, in refusing to admit converted Hereticks; but, on the contrary, that all possi∣ble means should be used to cause them to return into the bosom of the Church.

The Second Canon is against two Bishops who ventur'd to Ordain out of their Diocesses.

The Third Canon is concerning one Bishop John, who by his Deputies had approved the Con∣demnation of Symphosius and Dictinius. P. Innocent's Opinion is, That his Case ought to be ex∣amined, as well as that of the others, to know whether he had acted with Sincerity.

In the Fourth he speaks of irregular Ordinations practised in Spain, contrary to the Canons: He says, That they are so many, that it were impossible to apply a Remedy; and so he thinks it convenient to leave what is past to God's Judgment: But for the future to establish a Rule, That whosoever shall Ordain contrary to the Canons, shall be deprived of the Sacerdotal Dignity, to∣gether with those that received Orders.

The Fifth is concerning a business of Patruinus, Bishop of Merida, which, he saith, ought to be examined, and those punished that complain of his Ordination, if they had unjustly accu∣sed him.

The Sixth containeth Rules to be observed in the choice of fit persons to be Ordained.

To understand well the Three following Letters of Pope Innocent; it is to be noted, That the Bishops of Africa and Numidia having condemned both Pelagius and Coelestius in the Councils of Carthage and Numidia, assembled in the Year 416, wrote to Pope Innocent, to give him an Ac∣count of the Sentence which they pronounced against both those Hereticks, and their Doctrine, that so they might add to their judgment the Authority of the See of Rome; and so much the rather, because Coelestius had thought fit to appeal, and it was reported that P. Innocent counte∣nanced them. And for this reason Aurelius and Four more of the principal Bishops wrote ano∣ther familiar Letter to him concerning some disadvantageous Reports that had been raised against him about that business.

In the Three following Letters, P. Innocent answereth the other Three that were brought to Rome by Bishop Julian; these are dated the 27th. of January, 417.

The First is directed to Aurelius and the Bishops in the Council of Carthage. He commends them at first for their Courage in condemning Error, and for their respect to the See of Rome, in consulting with it about what they had decided. From which he takes occasion to exalt the Authority of the See of Rome; affirming, That it is of Divine Right to have its Opinion in Ec∣clesiastical Matters, before any thing be determined in the Provinces concerning them. It is pro∣bable that the African Bishops did not own that Right, since they had definitively judged the Case of Pelagius and Coelestius, before they acquainted him with it; and they did not write to him as to a Judge, that might disanull what they had done, but only to get his Approbation of their Decisions, as a thing which he could not refuse to doe without being suspected of Heresie. And indeed this Pope who was supposed to favour Coelestius, having known his Errors could not forbear declaring against them; and commending the African Bishops, who had condemned their Authors. He subscribes to their Judgment, and proves by several Reasons the Necessity of the Grace of Jesus Christ. The First is taken from Prayer, which supposeth that we owe to God's Help, and not to our Free-will, the good that we doe. He says, That Man being fallen by the Abuse of his Free-will, must be raised again by the Grace of Jesus Christ. That our Saviour not only delivered him from Sins past, but that knowing his weakness, he also prepared him Helps and Remedies to preserve him for the future; and that we must of necessity be overcome, if we be not succoured by him, who alone can make us Conquerors. Necesse est, ut quo auxiliante vincimus, eo iterum non adjuvante, vincamur. By which Principles he condemneth all those who affirm that there is no need of God's Grace to doe good, and judgeth them unworthy of the Church's Communion: He saith, that refusing to others God's Succour, they are bereaved of it themselves, and ought to be cut off from the Church as rotten Members. He saith further, That if they acknowledge their Error, and admit of God's Grace, being sincerely converted, it

is the Bishop's Duty to help them, and not to deny them the Grace which the Church grants to those that are fallen, by admitting them to the Communion of the Church.

He speaks much to the same purpose in that Letter which follows, directed to Silvanus Valen∣tinus, and other Bishops, who had been present at the Council of Milevis. He seems to restrain that Maxim which he established, of referring all Church-affairs to the See of Rome only to Mat∣ters of Faith: Praesertim quoties fidei ratio ventilatur. He refutes particularly the Pelagian Er∣ror concerning Children dying before Baptism, whom they pretended to have a share of Eternal life.

The Third Letter of Innocent upon that Subject is his Answer to the Five Bishops, who writ to him, upon the suspicion of his Siding with Pelagius. He tells them, that by his Two former Letters he sufficiently discovered his Opinion concerning the Doctrine of that Heretick; That as to his Person, he had received certain Acts, by which it appeared, that he had been heard and absolved since the Council; but that he did not believe them, because it was plain from the Acts themselves, that he had not clearly abjured his Errors: He concludes with assuring them, That he had read Pelagius his Book which they sent him, and that he had found it to be full of Blas∣phemies; that he met with nothing in it that pleased him, or rather that he met with nothing there that did not displease him.

With this Letter there was a short Letter directed to Aurelius, but there is nothing remarkable in it.

These Letters should be put last, being written but a little before the Death of P. Innocent, which was upon the 12th. of March of the same Year, and long after those that follow about the business of S. Chrysostom, written in 404.

The Twenty-eighth is a Letter of Consolation to S. Chrysostom, soon after his Banishment.

The Twenty-ninth is directed both to his Clergy and People upon the same Subject. The Thirty-first to Theophilus, which is in Greek in Palladius, is the first of the Three. In the same Author there is another directed likewise to Theophilus.

The Thirtieth Letter to the Emperor Arcadius, as well as the pretended Answers of that Em∣peror to Innocent, and to his Brother Honorius, are spurious, grounded upon the Fable of Arca∣dius and Eudoxia's Excommunication. He that forged them, supposeth, That this Empress out-lived S. Chrysostom; but it is certain from Eunapius, who is quoted by Photius, Vol. 77. of his Bi∣bliotheca, that she died soon after S. Chrysostom's Banishment, and three Years before his Death.

The 32d. 33d. and 34th. Letters of P. Innocent, are written about the Persecutions exercised by John of Jerusalem against S. Jerom.

This Pope was skilfull in the Ecclesiastical Laws: He often speaketh in commendation of the Nicene Canons: He was very zealous for the Grandeur of the Roman Church, and insisted much upon her Rights and Privileges. He writes indifferently well, and he giveth such an Air to his Notions and Reasonings as recommends them, though they have not always that solidity and ex∣actness that might be expected. The Chronological Order of his Letters, which ought to have been observed in the Printing of them, is as follows:

In the Year 404.

• A Letter to Victricius, Bishop of Rouën, Febru∣ary 15. which is the II.
• A Letter to Theophilus XXXI.
• A Letter to S. John Chrysostom XXVIII.
• A Letter to the People of Constantinople XXIX.

In the Year 405.

• A Letter to Exuperius, Bishop of Tholouse, Fe∣bruary 20. III.

In the Year 413.

• A Letter to Boniface XIV.
• A Letter to Alexander XV.
• A Letter to Maximian XVI.
• A Letter to Alexander XVII.
• A Letter to Acacius of Beraea XIX.
• A Letter to Alexander XVIII.

In the Year 414.

• A Letter to the Bishops of Macedonia, Decem∣ber 13. XXII.
• A Letter to Marcian XXI.

In the Year 416.

• A Letter to Decentius, Bishop of Eugubium, March 17. I.
• A Letter to Aurelius, June 1. XII.
• A Letter to John of Jerusalem XXXII.
• A Letter to S. Jerom XXXIII.
• A Letter to Aurelius XXXIV.
• A Letter to a Council at Toledo XXIII.

In the Year 417. Jan. 27.

• A Letter to the Council of Carthage XXIV.
• A Letter to the Council of Milevis XXV.
• A Letter to Five Bishops XXVI.
• A Letter to Aurelius XXVII.

LETTERS without Date, the Time where∣of is not known.

• A Letter to the Bishop of Nuceria IV.
• A Letter to Maximus and Severus, Bishops of Abruzzo V.
• A Letter to Innocent, Agapetus, Macedonius and Marianus, Bishops of Apuleia VI.
• ...

• ... A Letter to Rufus, Gerontius, &c. Bishops of Macedonia VII.
• A Letter to Florentius, Bishop of Tivoli VIII.
• A Letter to Probus IX.
• A Letter to Aurelius and to S. Austin X.
• A Letter to Juliana XIII.
• A Letter to Laurentius XX.
• A Suppositious Letter to Arcadius XXX.

Saint JEROM.

SAint JEROM was Born in the Town of Strigonium a 1.82, Situated upon the Borders of * 1.83 Pannonia and Dalmatia. He came into the World about the 345 Year of Jesus Christ b 1.84. His Father Eusebius c 1.85 took very great Care of his Education: And having made him learn the first Principles of Languages in his own Countrey d 1.86, he sent him to Rome, where he had for his Tutor the famous Donatus e 1.87, under whom he made a wonderfull Progress in Philological

Learning f 1.88. But that he might make himself yet more perfect, having been baptized at Rome g 1.89, he resolved to go into Gaul, where were at that time many able Men, who made Learning flou∣rish. Having performed that Journey with Bonosus his ancient Companion h 1.90, and collected all the curious things he could meet with in Gaul, he returned to Rome, where he raised a very fine Library, designing to spend the rest of his Life in Studies and Retirement: But finding that nei∣ther Rome, nor his Native Countrey were fit Habitations for such as intended to lead that sort of Life, he resolved to withdraw into a far Countrey, and so leaving his Countrey, his Kindred and Estate, carrying only his Library, with a Summ of Money to bear the Charges of his Journey, he departed from Italy with Heliodorus i 1.91, Evagrius, Innocent, and Hylas, to go to the East. Eva∣grius left him at Antioch, but Heliodorus, Innocent, and Hylas accompanied him to the place of his Retirement. He went first to Jerusalem, and there staid some time, afterwards he went thro' the Provinces of the lesser Asia; and, Lastly, having tarried some time at Antioch, he went in∣to the dismal Solitudes of Syria, that were uninhabited, unless it were with a few Monks. He spent there Four years in Study, and Exercises of Piety: He learned the Rudiments of the He∣brew Tongue, and began to write Commentaries upon the Scripture. Heliodorus soon left him, Innocent and Hylas died in that Desart, and himself was taken very Sick, and being forced at last to quit it, he returned to Antioch. That Church was then divided by the Factions of Meletius, Paulinus and Vitalis, who all assumed the Title of Bishop of that City. S. Jerom made no difficulty what side to take. His Baptism made him a Son of the Church of Rome, and so he was obliged to own him, whom that Church acknowledged for lawful Bishop of Antioch. Having therefore written upon that Subject to Damasus, who was then Bishop of Rome, and hav∣ing received an Answer in favour of Paulinus, he embraced his party, and was ordained Priest by him, but upon condition that he should not quit that kind of Life which he had embraced, nor be obliged to perform any of the Functions of his Ministery k 1.92: This Ordination was about the Year 375. before the Peace was concluded betwixt Meletius and Paulinus in 378. S. Jerom might be about 35 Years old at that time. As he would not enter into Orders, but upon con∣dition not to be compelled to Exercise the Functions of his Ministery, so he did not think him∣self obliged to have his Name registred, nor to reside in the Church of Antioch; he left it there∣fore to go to Bethlehem, which he chose for his constant Habitation. Yet he did not stay there long, but went to Constantinople, where he conversed with S. Gregory Nazianzen, whom he calls his Master, and of whom he professes to have learned to expound the Holy Scripture. Having tar∣ried some time with this Saint, he had a Call to Rome about the Affairs of the Church, with Pau∣linus and S. Epiphanius l 1.93, whose interest he had Espoused against those of the East; this Journey was in all probability undertaken after the Death of Meletius in the Year 382. Damasus taking notice of S. Jerom's merit, kept him with him, that he might have a Man that was able to answer all Questions proposed from all parts. S. Jerom did not only discharge the parts of that difficult Employment most worthily, but composed several Books besides. He was likewise charged with the conduct of the most considerable Ladies of the Town m 1.94, by which means he got many Friends

and much credit. But as he severely reproved the Mis-demeanours of the Clergy, and the Vices of the people, so he got many Enemies, who endeavoured to render his Behaviour suspected. Af∣ter Damasus his Death, S. Jerom who this whole three Years that he was at Rome, longed for his Solitude, took Shipping in August, 385. to go back to Bethlehem, with a great many Persons that accompanied him. He passed thro Cyprus, where he saw S. Epiphanius; from thence he went to Antioch, where Paulinus received him courteously; and from Antioch he went to Jerusalem, and then into Egypt, where he stay'd some time with Didymus. Afterwards he visited the Monasteries of Nitria, and finding the Monks there adhering to Origen's Opinions, he returned to Bethlehem, whither the Ladies Paula, Eustochium, and Melania came soon after. He continued some time in that place in a little Cell. But the number of those that embraced that kind of Life being in∣creased, Paula built there a Church and four Monasteries, one for Men, and three for Women. S. Jerom then enjoying perfectly that Quietness which he so much desired, continued his Labours, and there composed the greatest part of his Works upon the Scripture. His rest was somewhat disturbed by the Quarels which he had with Rufinus, and with John of Jerusalem, upon the Ac∣count of Origenism; yet he went on with writing, and defended himself with a great deal of Vigour. He died very old in the Year of Christ, 420.

This Saint wrote great numbers of Books, full of profound Learning, and written with great Purity and Eloquence. In our Accounts, and Abridgments, we shall follow Marianus Victori∣us's Order, that he uses in the Edition which he published of S. Jerom's works.

The First Volume contains the Letters which S. Jerom writ, either to exhort his Friends to Vertue, or to instruct them, or to commend them in Panegyricks, or funeral Orations.

The First, directed to Heliodorus, was written by S. Jerom from his Solitude, some time after this Friend left him to return into his own Countrey. He exhorts him to come back again, by representing the great Advantages of a retired Life, with great force and Fineness, and by answering all the Reasons that might keep him from embracing it with abundance of Art. This Treatise is a Master-piece of Eloquence in its kind; nothing can be more florid, more agreeable, or more mov∣ing.

This Letter, saith he, whereof you will find some lines blotted with my tears, will put you in mind of the tears I shed, and of the Groans I uttered at your going from me. You then endeavoured by your Caresses, to sweeten the contempt that you cast upon my Intreaties.

....

I was not able to stop you at that time, and now I seek after you now you are absent.... No, I will use no more Intreaties, I will employ no more Caresses: Love that feels its self of∣fended ought to turn into Anger: You who regarded not my Supplications, will perhaps hear∣ken to my Reproaches. Nice Soldier, what are you doing in your Father's house?.... Re∣member that day wherein by Baptism you listed your self a Soldier of Christ, then you took an Oath of Fidelity to him, that you would spare neither Father nor Mother for his Service.... Tho' your little Nephew should hang about your Neck, tho' your Mother should tear her hair, and rend her clothes to show you the Bosom that carried you, to oblige you to stay; and tho' your Father should lie down upon the Threshold of the Door to stop you, step over your Father, and follow the Standard of the Cross with dry Eyes: It is great mercy to be cruel on such occasions. I know you will tell me, we have not an Heart of stone, nor Bowels of iron... The love of God, and the fear of Hell break all Chains. The Scripture, you will say, Com∣mands us to obey our Parents: Yes, but whosoever loveth them more than Christ, loseth his his own Soul. But this, you willsay, is to be understood, when they persecute us to make us deny Christ. You are mistaken, Brother, if you suppose that a Christian can be without Per∣secution: He is then most violently Assaulted, when he thinks himself most secure. Satan our Enemy is always like a Lyon seeking to devour us;... On the one side Pleasures court us, on the other Covetousness torments us.... You are not allowed to enjoy your own Estate, you must renounce all for Jesus Christ. If you will be Heir to the Goods of this World, you cannot be Co∣heir with Jesus Christ. Do you know the meaning of the word Monk? Why do you remain in the World, you that ought to be alone?... But what! you will answer me then, are all those that live in Cities no Christians? You are not in the same condition with others. Hear the words directed unto you by our Saviour; If you will be perfect, sell all that you have, give it to the poor, and come and follow me. Have you vowed perfection? A perfect Servant should have nothing but Jesus Christ. So that if you be desirous of this World's Goods, you are no longer in that State of perfection which you have embraced. Perhaps you will alledge the Ex∣ample of those Churchmen who live in Cities; shall I find fault with their Resolutions▪ God forbid, that I should speak evil of those that succeed the Apostles, who consecrate the Body of Jesus Christ with their Sacred mouths, who make us Christians, and who holding the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven in their hands, judge, if I may so say, before the day of

Judgment, and are the Guardians of the Virginity of the Spouses of Christ. It is not with Monks as with Secular Church-men: These ••eed the Sheep of Christ, and we receive from them the spiritual Food: they live of the Altar, and we should be guilty if we did not bring our Offerings to the Altar. I am not permitted to sit down before a Priest, and if I sin he may deliver me to Satan; if you are sollicited to take Orders, I shall rejoyce with you for your Exaltation, but shall fear a fall... for as he who worthily discharges his Ministery, acquires a degree of perfection; so he on the contrary that comes to the Altar unworthily, is guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ. All Bishops are not Bishops. If the Example of S. Peter com∣forts you, let that of Judas terrifie you. If you admire Stephen's Sanctity, let the Fall of Ni∣cholas fright you. It is not the Ecclesiastical Dignity that makes good Christians.... It is not easie for all men to have S. Paul's Graces, nor S. Peter's Holiness, who now are reigning with Christ. If a Monk falls, a Priest may pray for him, but who shall pray for the fall of a Priest? S. Jerom having thus far prosecuted his reasonings, endeth with these Acclamations. Imitating, saith he, those Pilots, who happily steered their Ship between Rocks and Banks of Sand! O Wilderness, he crys out, always covered with the Flowers of Jesus Christ! O Solitude, where the Stones that are made use of to build the City of the great King, spoken of in the Revelations, are to be found! O happy Retirement, where Men may have familiar Conversation with God! What do you do, Brother, in the World? how long will you dwell under the shadow of Houses? till what time will you be in the Prison of smoaking Cities? What are you afraid of in these solitary places? Is it Poverty? but Jesus Christ calleth the poor Happy. Do's labour astonish you? Can he that strives in the publick Exercises be Crowned before he has fought? Do you think of your Diet? a lively Faith fears not hunger. Do you dread lying upon the naked ground, with your Bodies worm out with Fasting? Re∣member that Jesus Christ rests there along with you. Are you Scared with the extent of this hideous Solitude? Paradise is open to you. These are some of the Arguments which S. Jerom uses to perswade Heliodorus to return to his Retirement.

The Second Letter to Nepotian Heliodorus his Nephew was composed by S. Jerom long after the First, as he says himself at the beginning.

Being, saith he, yet young, when I struggled with the First motions of youth, by the Austerities of Solitude; I write to Heliodorus your Uncle a Letter of Exhortation, full of Complaints and Tears, to show how sorry I was for the ab∣sence of my Friend. I plaid then suitably to my Age, and used all the Flowers of Rhetorick with which my self at that time was full. But now I am Old, and my Forehead is full of wrinkles, and my Chin covered with a white Beard, I can no longer do what I could do then.

And yet, he Discourses here after a manner youthful enough, producing several Examples taken out of Ecclesiastical and prophane History, to shew that old Men have not the same heat nor vigour that young Men have. He addeth,

Expect not therefore from me youthful Declama∣tions, florid Sentences, sweet Words, poignant or acute Expressions at the end of my Periods, to draw the applause of those that hear us; I beg of God only the lights of his Wisdom.... Hearken then, as S. Cyprian saith, to a Discourse that hath more Strength than Sweetness; Hearken to him that is your Colleague, and your Father by his age.... I know that your holy Uncle Heliodorus, who is now a Minister of Jesus Christ, has taught and do's teach you Ho∣liness, and that his Life is an example of Vertue to you: But take from me besides these small Directions, and joyning this Treatise to that which I writ before to your Uncle, learn of this how to be a perfect Church-man, as the former may instruct you, how to be a good Monk.

These are the main Precepts which S. Jerom giveth to a Church-man in this excellent Letter.

A Clerk, saith he, that serveth the Church of Jesus Christ ought to begin with the knowledge of what his Name signifies; and then Labour to be what is signified by it. The Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth a Lot or a Portion: therefore the Name Clerk is given to Church-men, either because they are consecrated to the Lord, or because the Lord is their Portion, but whosoever belongeth to the Lord, or hath the Lord to his Portion, ought to live as one that possesseth the Lord, and in whom the Lord dwelleth: he is to possess nothing but the Lord.... And so indeed, in serving at the Altar, I ought to live of the Altar: but ought to be content with with what is necessary for Food and Raiment; and stript of all things, I ought only to follow the Cross..... I conjure you therefore, and I admonish you, let not Interest make you enter into Christ's Service, neither heap up greater Riches in the Ecclesiastical State than you did when you were in the World, least they say unto you: Their lot will do them no good: We see some men wealthier since they have been Monks, than they were before: some Clerks have Riches while they serve poor Jesus Christ, which they had not while they served the rich Devil: so that the Church groans to see them rich in her Bosom, that were Beggers whilst they were in the World. You must set the Poor and Pilgrims at your Table, and Jesus Christ will be one of the Guests. Avoid those Clerks as a plague who make Merchandice of the Church's Goods, who become rich and proud, tho' they were poor and contemptible enough before..... Let Women never come near your Houses, or at least but seldom; have no Familiarity with the Virgins consecrated to God, either be acquainted with none, or love them all equally: Dwell not in the same House with them. Trust not your past Chastity: you are neither holier than David, nor stronger than Sampson, nor wiser than Solomon. Visit not Women alone, speak not with them face to face: but avoid whatsoever may beget evil Suspicion.... This is a thing shameful for

us. The Priests of false Deities, Comedians, Actors, and the basest of men may be Legatees, only Clergy men and Monks cannot, the Law forbids them; and a Law that was not made by Emperors who were Enemies to Religion, but by Christian Princes. Yet I complain not of this Law, but I am sorry that we deserved it.... The Law was enacted out of a prudent foresight, and yet it is not strong enough to suppress Covetousness. We elude the Law by Trustees.... The Glory of a Bishop is to give ease to the Misery of the Poor, and it is his greatest disgrace to apply himself to increase wealth.

S. Jerom describes here the Lewdness of some Clergy-men, and the baseness of others to ingratiate themselves with rich Men, that they might make them their Heirs. He adds afterwards, That a Bishop ought to do what he preaches; that his mouth, his hands, and his mind are exactly to agree together. He recommends to Priests Submission to their Bishops, and that they should honour them as their Fathers. But at the same time he warneth Bishops, to remember that they are Priests and not Masters: Sacerdotes se esse noverint, non dominos; And that they are to use Church-men as Church-men, if they them∣selves would be honoured as Bishops. He blames the Custom of some Churches where Priests were not permitted to speak before their Bishop. He would have a Preacher to excite the tears of his Auditors, rather than their applause. He says, That his preaching ought to be neither De∣clamatory nor Satyrical, but that he ought to expound the Mysteries of our Religion, and the Morality of the Gospel, with Clearness and Gravity. Afterwards he goes to the manner how Church-men ought to be habited. No Clergy-man in his Opinion should affect either black or white Garments, but avoid Neatness and Slovenliness: theone is a Mark of Effeminateness, and the other is often the effect of a foolish Vanity. As to Alms-deeds, S. Jerom complains that in his time some Bishops and Ecclesiasticks distributed small Alms to the poor, to enrich them∣selves, by appropriating to themselves considerable Sums under that pretence of those Alms. He tells the Bishops that they ought to take special care whom they intrusted with the Dispensation of Alms. He reproves those who were very careful to see Churches well built, sumptuously ador∣ned with Marble and Gold, and the Altars covered with precious Stones, but took no care to make a good choice of Ministers of Jesus Christ. He forbids Church-men, and particularly Bishops to make any Feasts for Lay-men, but recommends to them Sobriety. Yet he de∣sires them not to proceed to Excess in their Fasts, but that such as they shall observe should be pure, chaste, moderate, simple, and without Superstition. He laughs at those, who refusing to eat Oyl upon Fast-days, inquired after Dainties and Meats not easie to be had; and at those, who forbearing to drink Water or to eat Bread, drank the Juice of pleasant Herbs. He declaims against those Ecclesiasticks, that affected to make a shew of their Mortifications and good Works, to get Glory to themselves. Lastly, he recommends to Clergy-men Charity, Prudence, Discretion, and Modesty. He takes notice at the latter End, that he writes this Letter in his Retirement at Bethlehem, Ten years after the Book of Virginity, which he wrote at Rome. This shews that this Letter is of the Year 393.

Nepotian to whom this Letter was written, dying not long after, S. Jerom writ the Third Let∣ter to his Uncle Heliodorus, to comfort him for the Death of his Nephew, of whom he makes a Panegyrick. This Letter which is not less florid or less eloquent, is full of Historical passages, colle∣cted with much Affectation: He produces the examples of several Heathens who despised Death: and shows that it ought less to be feared by a Christian. That Heliodorus ought to be com∣forted, since Nepotian was in possession of eternal Happiness. Then he sets forth his Vertues, to∣gether with the misfortunes and Miseries of this Life, whence he concludes, that we are to esteem those Happy, who are out of this World. There he makes an elegant Comparison, betwixt the power of Kings and Bishops. A King, says he, Commands men that are obliged to obey whether they will or no; whereas the Bishop hath Dominion over those only that are willing to obey. The Prince brings men under by Terror: The Bishop is bound to serve those that are under his Conduct. The former protects the Bodies which must die; but the latter takes care of Souls to give them e∣ternal Life. All the faithful have their Eyes upon their Bishop, his Family and conduct is observed by every Body, he is to be an example to the whole Church: and there is none but thinks he can do what he does.

Besides, there is in that Letter, an excellent Portraicture of the uncertainty of this Life. We die daily, saith he, We alter continually, and yet we are so foolish, that we live as if we were to abide eternally. The time I spend in dictating, writing, reading over again, and correcting, is so much time towards the shortning of my Life. The stops, and Letters of my Amanuensis, are so many moments to lessen the length of my Life; the only thing that turns to account, is the love which we have for Jesus Christ. Charity never comes to an end, but lives for ever in the Heart, and by it our Brother Nepotian is still present with us after his Death; it is that which unites us, tho' we be separated by a vast space of Ladn or Sea.

The Fourth Letter is directed to one Rusticus a Western Monk, to whom S. Jerom gives Rules for that kind of Life, which he was to follow. It begins with this Sentence, None is more happy than a Christian, seeing he hath a Promise of the Kingdom of Heaven: None is to Fight more, since he is in danger of his Life; none is stronger, since he overcometh the Devil: And then he ex∣horts Rusticus to persevere with Zeal in that profession which he had embraced. He enjoyns him to be respectful to his Mother, but not to be too much tyed to her, nor to hold any Conversa∣tion with other Women. He adviseth him to renounce all these things, and to withdraw from the

World. He warneth him not lightly to take upon him Holy Orders, or to affect to be a Master before he had been a Disciple; and to chuse rather, to live in a Monastery, than to be an Her∣mit in a Solitude; and he represents the Inconveniencies of that kind of Life:

Commonly, saith he, an Hermit becometh proud; he thinks himself to be some Body, and forgetteth what he is; he eats what he pleases, sleeps as much as he will, fears no Body, and you shall find him oftner in the Town, than in his Cell. Not, saith he, That I find fault with a solitary Life, which I have so often commended: but I would have these Soldiers come out of Monasteries where they have learned their Exercises, least the severe beginnings of Solitude should amaze them.

S. Jerom recommends to him afterwards the Vertues and Exercises of a right Monk, and particularly, working with his hands, Reading and Meditation upon the Holy Scriptures, Prayer, Obedience to Superiours, Chastity, Fasting, &c. He blames the Monks that live like Seculars, and observes, that they used to chuse Monks to make them Church-men. He tells Rusticus, That he ought not to begin to write early, but Practise long before he under∣took to teach. At the end of this Letter he praises two Bishops of Gaul, Proculus Bishop of Marseilles, and Exuperius Bishop of Tholouse; what he saith of the latter is very remarkable. This Holy Bishop, saith he, imitates the Widow of Sarepta; he feeds others, and starves himself; his face is pale with fasting; nothing but other Mens hunger troubles him; He has given all his Estate to the poor, and yet there is none richer than he; He carries the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ in an Osier Basket, and his precious Blood in a Glass Vessel; one may say, That he drove Covetous∣ness out of the Temple of the Lord. Follow, saith he, to Rusticus, at the latter End of the Letter, the steps of this good Bishop, and of other Persons who imitate his Vertues, those Saints whom the Pastoral Dignity has made poorer and more humble. And if you desire to embrace a condition more perfect, get out of your Country, as Abraham did, leave your Kindred, and get you to an unknown place. If you have any Goods, sell them, and distribute the price of them to the Poor. If you have none, you are discharged of a great Burden. Strip your self of all things to follow Jesus Christ only. Nudum Christum nudus sequere. It is hard, I confess, it is Great, and it is Difficult, but the recompence is Infinite. He mentions in this Letter, that which he had written to Nepotian, and so this was written after the Year 393, perhaps in 394.

In the Fifth to Florentius, who came to Jerusalem, he commends the Charity of that Holy man: He sent him a Letter to be delivered to Rufinus, who was to go from Egypt to Jerusalem with Melania, where he speaks as much to the advantage of that Presbyter, as he spoke afterwards since to his Disparagement. I would not, saith he to Florentius, have you judge of me by his Ver∣tues, you shall see in him the visible marks of Holiness, I am but dirt and ashes, and I think my self Happy if my weak Eyes can but behold his Vertues; he his pure and white as Snow, but I am all ever covered with Sins. S. Jerom writ this Letter from the Solitudes of Syria about the Year 372.

Florentius having answered S. Jerom, this Saint wrote again a Sixth Letter, to tell him, that having read his, he was tempted to go to Jerusalem, but he durst not quit his Solitude. He prays him to desire of Rufinus the Commentary upon the Canticles that was composed by Rheticius Bishop of Autun, that he might take a Copy of it; and to tell him, that an Old man one Paulus, desired the Copy of Tertullian which he had lent him: He intreats him likewise that he would cause some Books to be transcribed for him, which he had not, of which he sent him a Memorandum: and send him S. Hilary's Commentary upon the Psalms, and his Book of Synods, which himself had Copied with his own hand at Triers: and in requital he profers to communicate to him the Books which he had in his own Library.

The Seventh is directed to Laeta Wife of Toxotius Paula's Son. This Lady had a young Daughter called Paula, whom her Grand-mother designed for a Religious Life. S. Je∣rom writes this Letter to the Mother of this little Girl, to teach her how she should breed her up, and exhorts her to send her as soon as she could to his Monastery at Bethlehem. Her Grand-father was a Priest of Jupiter, but the rest of the Family were Christians. This made S. Jerom say pleasantly, that it was a surprizing thing that this Old man should make much of a Girl that sung the Praises of Jesus Christ, and be compassed about with a Family of Christians, which gave him hopes that he would be converted: For, saith he pleasantly, I fansie that Jupiter him∣self might have believed in Jesus Christ, had he had such a Family as yours; what he says after∣wards is more serious. Tho' he laughs at my Letter, and calls me Fool and Sensless, yet I despair not of his Conversion, his Son-in-Law did the same, before he embraced the Faith of Jesus Christ. No man is born a Christian, but becomes one afterwards..... It is never too late to be converted.

It will not be thought amiss, that I should set down here some of those Precepts which S. Je∣rom gives for the Education of a young Woman, to shew that it is no new thing to see retired Persons, and those that are furthest from the commerce of civil Life, teach the People of the World how to breed their Children. It is strange that such as have Children to bring up, should be obliged to do it well, and to have recourse to those that have made a vow never to have Children, or a Family themselves.

Thus, saith S. Jerom, is that Virgin to be Educated, whose Soul is designed to be the Temple of God. Let her not hearken to, let her not learn nor dis∣course of any thing, but what is proper to inspire the love of God. Let her never hear filthy Talk, nor learn profane Songs, but let her Voyce be betimes accustomed to the singing of Psalms: Let no Boys come near her, her Maids and Governesses should be wise, and kept from the Company of disorderly People, least they teach her more evil than they have learned them∣selves.

Let them teach her to read with Box or Ivory Letters, whereof she may remember the Names..... She ought to be made to love Study and Labour, either by promising her Re∣ward, or by provoking her by Example. If she be of a soft Temper, reprove her not too fiercely; she ought to be encouraged with Commendation to raise in her mind a Desire to ex∣cel others, and some trouble to see her self out-done. Above all, have care that she be not dis∣gusted with Study, least she come to hate it when she becomes older. Let her read the Sen∣tences of the Holy Scripture, and chuse for her an able Master, a Man of a good Life, who may take pains to teach her to read. Despise not these beginnings as inconsiderable, for the rest depend upon them. The beginnings of Reading and Pronunciation are not taught alike by a skilful, and by a wary Man: Do not let her use her self to speak her words by halves, nor to take Pleasure in handling of Gold or Purple: The one will hurt her Speech, and the other her Manners. Let her not learn that in her Infancy, which she must forget afterwards..... Evil is easily imitated, and we often take up their Vices, whose Vertues we cannot reach: Her Nurse should be sober, no Tatler, nor given to Wine..... Let her clothes be modest, convenient for the State for which you design her: Let not her Ears be bored, nor her Face us'd to Painting: she should not have her Hair dyed fair, nor her Garments adorned with Gold, Pearls or Jewels, unless you design her for Hell fire.... When she grows older, let her fol∣low her Parents to the Church, but never go out to return to the Pomps of the World. Let her keep to her Chamber, and never appear at Feasts, or publick Meetings: but she ought not to use too much Abstinence till she comes to the Age of strength, least she prejudices her Health. Let her take that which helps necessity, but not what feeds Luxury: Let her not be at Musick-Meetings, nor hear musical Instruments, but learn and repeat daily Sentences out of the Holy Scripture; She should never go abroad without her Mother, nor grow very Familiar with any one of her Servants; provide her a wise, prudent and vertuous Governess, that may show her the way to rise in the Night to sing Psalms, to rehearse the morning Hymns, and at Tierce, Sext, Nones, and Vespers. Let her pray, and work Night and Day; let her learn to handle the Distaffe, to turn the Wheel and spin Wooll; Let her not meddle with Embroidering either of Gold or Silver; let her be modestly cloathed, and soberly fed; she should not fast exces∣sively, but observe Lent regularly, and take no pleasure in Baths.

To these moral Precepts, S. Jerom adds an Instruction for the Studies of young Girls, and advises them to read all the Canonical Books, both of the Old and New Testaments, not ex∣cepting the Canticles. He advises them not to read the Apocrypha, but the Books of S. Athana∣sius, and of S. Hilary. He concludes by exhorting Laeta to send her Daughter to the Monastery at Bethlehem. This Letter is written from the Solitude of Bethlehem, about the Year 400.

The Eighth Letter was written in the Year 411. after the taking of Rome by the Goths, it is di∣rected to a Virgin of the First quality, one Demetrias, who was retired into Africa, and there had embraced a Religious Life. S. Jerom having commended her Grand-mother Proba, directs her how to maintain her Virginity, by recommending to her several Exercises of Piety, as read∣ing of the Holy Scripture, renouncing the Pomps of the World, exercising Penance, moderate Fasting, Obedience, Humility, Modesty, Alms-deeds, Prayers at all hours of the day, and work∣ing with her hands. He advises her to stick to the Faith of Pope Innocent, and to beware of the Errors of the Origenist's, and tells her, that she should chuse rather to dwell in a Nunnery with other Virgins, than to live alone. But he would have her avoid the Company of the Ladies of the World. He finishes his Letter with Commendations of Virginity. It is to be noted, that in those days Virgins consecrated to God might go out of their Cloysters, but S. Jerom advises them to do it seldom. He calleth Penance, a Second Plank after Shipwrack. He observeth that Fasting is not properly a Vertue, but the ground of all Vertues; that Chastity is a degree to ar∣rive at Perfection, but if it be single, it is not enough to merit the Crown of Heaven. He ad∣monishes Virgins not to be lifted up, because of the perfection of their State, but to humble themselves under the mighty hand of God, who resisteth the Proud, and giveth Grace to the humble. But, saith he, what is of Grace is no recompence for Works, but a Free-gift, wherefore the Apostle writeth, that the good which Man doth is not to be attributed, either to his Will or Labour, but to the mercy of God; and yet to will, or not to will, is in our Power; but what depends upon us, doth not do so without God's help. Velle & non velle nostrum est, ipsumque quod nostrum est, sine Dei miseratione nostrum non est. At last he exhorts Virgins, rather to bestow their Estates upon the Poor, than to beautifie Churches.

The Ninth Letter is directed to a Lady of Quality, one Salvina, who had lost her Husband Ne∣bridius, Son to the Empresses Sister. Tho' S. Jerom knew her not, yet he writ to her at the re∣quest of one of her Friends called Avitus. He begins his Letter with Commendations of Ne∣bridius, whose Vertues were the more to be admired, because he had spent his Life at Court, and in great Employments; and then advises his Widow to render to her Children, what she owed her Husband, by giving them a good Education, exhorting her earnestly to continue a Widow, and giving Rules for her Behaviour. He exceedingly blames Second Marriages, and looks upon them rather as tolerated to prevent a greater Evil, than permitted as a good. He observes in that Letter, that Riches do not hinder a Man from being saved, provided he makes good use of them; as Poverty doth not make a Man holy or just, if he doth not avoid Sin. He calls Pe∣nance the Remedy of the miserable: He says that men should have a care of Sinning, out of

hopes of rising again by Repentance; that such Wounds should be prevented, as cannot be cured without Pain; that it is a far greater advantage to enter the Haven of Salvation with a sound Vessel full fraught with Merchandices, than to be forced to swim upon a Plank, in danger of be∣ing broken against the Rocks, and the Waves of an agitated Sea. Salvina or Silvina, to whom this Letter was written, was the Daughter of that Gildo Governour of Africa, who going about to usurp the Empire, after Theodosius his Death, perished Anno 398. She was a Widow, and dwelt at Constantinople when S. Chrysostom was expelled from thence, as we learn from Palladius, who tells us, That S. Chrysostom before he went away, entred into the Baptistery, and called to him Olympias, the Deaconnesses, Procla, Pentadia, and Silvina, Nebridius's Widow: So that S. Jerom's Letter might be written about the Year 400. not long after the Death of her Husband.

The Tenth is written to another young Widow named Furia, of the Race of the Camilli. He disswades her from Marrying a second time, tho' she had had no Children by her first Husband; he tells her, that in this particular, she should not regard neither the Remonstrances, or threat∣nings of her Father, but he recommends to her, that she should be sober, modest, constant in reading and praying, that she should give Alms, avoid the World, despise its Pomps, &c. Lastly, he represents the inconveniencies of a Second Marriage very livelily, and says at the latter end of the Letter, that he writ it two Years after his Books against Jovinian, that were composed, some∣time before the Year 392. and so this Letter is of 394.

The following Letter to Ageruchia, is upon the same Subject: He does speak there with less Zeal against Second Marriages, than in the foregoing; and yet he professes not to condemn them. He says that he had seen at Rome a Woman buried by her Twenty second Husband, and a Hus∣band who had buried Twenty Wives. At the end of this Letter he Discourses against such as are too much in love with this Life, and the good things of this World. Men, says he, build as if they were to live for ever, and they live as if they were sure of Life next day. There is none so aged but promises to himself, That he shall live one year more, and so forgets what he is: and when he is come to the age that he desired, yet does he not think himself near Death, and flatters himself with the Life of many years to come. He concludes this with a Description of the pitiful condition, the Roman Empire, was reduced to by the Incursions of the Barbarians, especially in Gaul and Spain, which made him afraid of Rome it self. This shews, that this Letter was written some time before the taking of Rome, which happened in 410.

In the Twelfth Letter S. Jerom prescribes to Gaudentius some Rules for the Education of his Daughter Pacatula, whom he designed for a Religious Life: It contains such Precepts as are in the Letter to Laeta; there he bewails the misfortune of the taking of Rome, in 410.

The Thirteenth is directed to Paulinus afterwards Bishop of Nola, who intending to be a Monk, addressed himself to S. Jerom, as a Person perfectly well skilled in the Exercises of a Mo∣nastical Life, to ask his advice how he should behave himself. This Father having with great Hu∣mility answered Paulinus his Complements, for his living so long solitary in the Wilderness of Bethlehem, Counsels him to retire out of Cities, if he resolved to embrace a Monastick State.

In this Separation from the World, he chiefly places the difference between a Monastical, and an Ecclesiastical State. If, Says he, you will enter upon the Ministery of the Church, and perform the Functions of the Priesthood, if you are pleased with the Episcopal Dignity; then keep in Towns, and work out the Salvation of your own Soul by saving others: but if you would be a Monk, that is, live Solitarily, what do you do in Towns, which are no Habitations for Monks, but for those that love the World?.... Priests and Bishops ought to imitate the Apostles and Apostolical Men, to suc∣ceed them in their Vertue, as they do in their Dignity; as for us, we have for our Commanders, The Pauls, the Antonies, the Julians, the Macarii, the Hilarions; and to come to the Scripture it self, Elias is the first of our Order, Elisha is one of us, the Sons of the Prophets that dwelt in the Fields and Desart places, and upon the Banks of Jordan, they are our Masters. The Sons of Re∣chab, who drunk neither Wine nor Sider, are also of this Number. S. Jerom having exalted the Monastical State by these Examples, prescribes several Rules to Paulinus for the Exercises which he was to follow in his Retirement. He thanks him afterwards for the Books that he sent him, in Commendation of Theodosius, and having commended it, he exhorts Paulinus to apply himself to the reading of the Holy Scripture, telling him that if he had but that Foundation, nothing would be more learned, more sweet, or more acceptable, and better written than his Works. From thence he takes occasion, to describe the Stile and Character of the Latin Ecclesiastical Au∣thors. Tertullian, saith he, is full of Sentences, but his Elocution is hard. S. Cyprian's Stile is smooth, and like the running waters of a Fountain, which passes away quietly, and without Agi∣tation; but having wholly apply'd himself to the teaching of Vertue, and being busy'd by Persecu∣tions, he writ nothing upon the Holy Scripture: The glorious Martyr Victorinus can hardly tell his meaning. Lactantius is like a River of a Ciceronian Eloquence; would to God he could as easily have confirmed our Doctrine, as he overthrows that of other Mens. Arnobius his Stile is uneven, without method or order. S. Hilary hath an high and swelling Stile, like the Gallick Tragedies, but intermixing th•••• way of writing with Grecian Flowers, he often writes long Periods and very in∣tricate, which can neither be read nor understood by Men of ordinary Capacities. And having thus set forth the Character of those ancient Authors, he giveth that of Paulinus in these Terms: You have, saith he, a great deal of Wit, a wonderful abundance of Expressions, a natural pureness, and rare prudence. If you add to that Eloquence, the Study and understanding of the

Scripture, I shall quickly see you the first of our Authors. And to this he exhorts him. This Letter was written before Paulinus was ordained, and after his Conversion about the Year 380.

The Fourteenth Letter to Celantia, is not like S. Jerom's Stile. It is thought to be written by Paulinus Bishop of Nola. It contains very useful Instructions, and Precepts for a Lady, to lead a Christian Life in the midst of Honours, Riches, and the Perplexities of managing her Fa∣mily.

The Fifteenth Letter to Marcella, is in Commendation of one Acella a Virgin.

The Sixteenth directed to a Virgin, named Principia, is the Panegyrick of Marcella, a Roman Lady, Daughter of Albina, who being left a Widow seven Months after Marriage, resolved to continue so, though she was courted by the Consul Cerealis, and was the first of the Roman La∣dies that embrac'd a Religious Life. S. Jerom, after a description of her Vertues, commends her for procuring the Condemnation of Origen's Books, and for the Courage which she shewed when Rome was taken; he observes that she died quickly after, and that he writ this Panegyrick two Years after her Death; which shews, that this Letter was written in 412 or 413.

The Seventeenth Letter is from Bethlehem, in the Name of Paula and Eustochium, to Marcella, whom they invite to come to them, and to visit the holy Places. It may have been written a∣bout the Year 400.

The Eighteenth is written in S. Jerom's Name to the same Lady, and upon the same Subject.

The Nineteenth is a handsome Letter of Thanks to Eustochium, for a Present of some Fruits that she sent him upon S. Peter's Day.

The following Letter to Marcella is likewise to thank him for some Presents, which that Lady had sent him from Rome.

The Twenty-first is written to an Old Man of Spain of 100 Years of Age. S. Jerom congra∣tulates with him, that God had given him a fine Old Age, freed from the ordinary infirmities, common to persons of those Years; he commends his Vertues, and desires of him the Commenta∣ries of Fortunatianus, the History of Aurelius Victor, and Novatian's Letters, and tells him that he would send him the Life of the Blessed Paul the first Hermite. This Letter may have been written in S. Jerom's first Retreat.

The Two and Twentieth is a Treatise of Virginity to Eustochium. Having spoken of the Ex∣cellency of it, of the Difficulty of preserving and the Danger of losing it, he lays down Precepts which a Virgin is to observe to keep her self pure. He forbids her to drink Wine; he bids her a∣void dainty Fare, Effeminateness, Pleasures and superfluous Ornaments; he recommends Solitude to her, and the Reading of the Holy Scripture, Prayer, Renouncing of the Things of this World, Fasting, Humility, and other Christian Vertues. He speaks against some Clergy-men who kept de∣vout Sisters in their Houses; And who (saith he) under pretence of Spiritual consolation, enter∣tained a carnal commerce. He blames those also that courted Ladies; and to please them, con∣descended to do several things unworthy of their Character. To dissuade Eustochium from read∣ing prophane Books, he tells her, That being once too earnest in reading Cicero, Plautus, and other prophane Authors, he fell into a violent Fever, and by it into a kind of Agony, and then was caught up in the Spirit to the Tribunal of Jesus Christ; where having been soundly whips for reading prophane Authors too much, he was forbidden to read them any more: He assures Eustochium, that this Story is not a Dream, and calls the Tribunal where he appeared, and the Judgment that was given against him to attest the Truth of what he says: Yet when Rufinus upbraided him afterwards, that for all that he had not given over reading prophane Books, he laughs at his Simplicity, and jests upon him for taking a Dream for a Truth. Declaiming against Covetousness, he says, that a Monk of Nitria having got together One hundred Pence which were found in his Cell after he was dead, they buried him with his Money, and with this Impre∣cation; Let this Money perish with thee. He observes upon that occasion, that there were Five thousand Monks in the Solitudes of Nitria, dwelling in separated Cells; and that there were three sorts of Monks in Egypt, namely the Coenobites, who lived in common; the Anchorets, who dwelt alone in the Wilderness; and thosethat were called Remoboth, who lived Two and Two together, and maintained themselves after their own way, with the work of their own hands. He blames this last sort, and describes the manner of living of the Anchorets and Coenobites at large. After this digression, he concludes with commending the Purity of Eustochium. In all likelihood this Trea∣tise was composed at Rome about the latter end of Damasus's Pontisicate, about the Year 385.

The Two and Twentieth is written to Marcella upon the Recovery and Conversion of Blaesilla, Paula's Daughter, and Sister of Eustochium. This young Widow, after the Torment of a vio∣lent Fever for Thirty days together, had embraced a Solitary life. S. Jerom commends her for that generous Resolution, and confounds those that blamed her. One may find in that Letter a handsome description of the Habit of those ancient Nuns. S. Jerom speaks there against the Fi∣nery of Women. This Letter was written at Rome about the Year 383.

The next was written much about the same time; it is directed to Paula, concerning the Death of an Holy Nun, one Lea. S. Jerom shews, that they ought to rejoyce for her Death, because she enjoy'd Happiness. He commends her Vertues, and comparing her Death, with that of one designed to be Consul, which happened at the same time; he shows the vast difference betwixt a poor Righteous Man's death, and that of a great, rich, and impious Lord.

The Four and Twentieth is a Letter of Consolation to Paula, upon the Death of her Daughter Blaesilla, who departed this Life four Months after her Conversion: S. Jerom shows, that we should not mourn for Christians who die in a State of Grace, but rather rejoyce for their Happi∣ness. He reproves Paula severely, because she had given way to excessive Grief. This Letter may pass for an exact Pattern of Elegant and Christian Consolation. It was composed at Rome about the Year 384.

The Five and Twentieth is likewise a Consolatory Letter to Pammachius, upon the Death of his Wife Paulina, who was also one of Paula's Daughters. He saith but little of Paulina's Death, but enlargeth much in Commendation of Pammachius, who left the World after his Wife's Death, and had bestowed great part of his Estate upon the Poor, and built an Hospital for Strangers in the Port of Rome. S. Jerom says at the latter end of this Letter, that so great a number of Monks flocked to his Monastery at Bethlehem, that he was obliged to send his Brother Paulinianus to sell the rest of the Estate which he had in his own Country, to enable him to support his Underta∣king. This informs us that this Letter was written at Bethlehem in 398.

The Twenty-sixth is a Funeral-Sermon for the famous Paula, whose Life he describes, and makes her Panegyrick. It is directed to her Daughter Eustochium. He sets down at the latter end some Epitaphs which he put upon the Grave and upon the Cave where that holy Lady was buried in Bethlehem, and he says that she died Febr. 22d. and was buried the 24th. under the Seventh Consulship of Honorius and Aristaenetus: That is, after our way of reckoning, the 404th. Year since the Nativity of our Saviour: And this proves that Funeral Oration to be of that same Year.

The Seven and twentieth Letter to a Spaniard, one Lucinius is very remarkable. S. Jerom exhorts that Man who had embraced a Monastical Life with his Wife's Consent, to prosecute the design which he had to come to Jerusalem. He tells him, that he had given Copies of his works to those whom he sent to him; That he had not translated Josephus his Books, nor the Writings of S. Papias, and S. Polycarp; That he translated only some Treatises of Origen and Didymus; That he had corrected the Version of the Septuagint, restored the Greek of the New Testament, and that he sent to him part of the Canonical Books, which he revised and made conformable to the truth of the Hebrew. He afterwards answers two Questions, which Lucinius had put to him about Saturday's Fast, and a frequent Communion. That Answer is too considerable not to be tran∣slated here. As to what you ask me concerning the Saturday's Fast, whether it ought to be kept; and about the Eucharist, whether it should be received every day, as is Customary in the Churches both of Italy and Spain, we have upon that Subject a Treatise of Hippolytus, a very Elo∣quent man, and several Authors have occasionally treated of that Matter; for my part, this is the advice I think ought to be given in that Point; That Ecclesiastical Traditions, not contrary to the Faith, ought to be observed after the same manner, that we received them from our Ancestors: And I am perswaded, that the Custom of one Church is not to be aboushed, because of a contrary one in use in another Church. Would to God that we could fast every day: Do we not read in the Acts of the Apostles, that both S. Paul, and they that were with him fasted in the days of Pentecost, and even upon Sunday's: Yet for all that they ought not to be accused for Manichees, because they did it out of a Spiritual good, before which a Carnal one is not to be pre∣ferred. As to the Eucharist, it is good to receive it daily, provided there be no prickings of Conscience, and no danger of receiving our own Condemnation. Not that I would have Men fast on Sundays, or in the Fifty days after Easter, but I must still return to my Principle, That every Countrey ought to follow its own Custom, and look upon the Ordinances of their Ancestors as Apostolical Laws. This Letter was written about the Year 406.

Lucinius to whom this Letter is directed being dead. S. Jerom comforts his Widow Theodora, in the following Letter, in which he citeth there the Books of S. Irenaeus with Commendation.

S. Jerom's Eight and twentieth Letter is a Funeral Oration, in Commendation of a Roman Lady called Fabiola. This Lady had a former very lewd Husband, and having procured a Se∣paration, she was married to another; but having acknowledged her fault, she did publick Pe∣nance, and was admitted to the Communion. She built at Rome an Hospital for sick Persons whom she had assisted with wonderful Zeal, and surprizing Charity. S. Jerom commendeth chiefly those generous Actions, and speaks of the Journey which she had undertaken to Bethle∣hem, where she remained some time with him. This Letter was written in 400, two years after the Funeral Discourse for Paulina, and Four years after that for Nepotian, as S. Jerom says in the beginning.

The Nine and twentieth is a Note to Theophilus, wherein he excuseth himself, that he had not yet translated into Latin that Bishop's Book concerning Easter, because of the troubles of the Church that had disquieted him, and Paula's Death which had overwhelmed him with Grief; So that this Letter was written in the Year 404.

In the Thirtieth, S. Jerom comforteth a Spaniard, one Abiga••s, for the Ioss of his sight, he commends his Piety, and desires him to exhort Theodora, Lucinius his Widow, to continue her Journey to Jerusalem, this shows that this Letter was written after Lucinius his Death, about the Year 408, or 409.

The Thirty first as likewise a Letter of comfort to another Blind man, one Castru∣tius, who was S. Jerom's Countrey-man. He thanks him for beginning his Journey to come to see him, but desires him, to undertake the Journey next year. The Year of

this Letter is not known. It is probable that it was written very near the same time with the foregoing.

In the Two and thirtieth, having administred comfort to Julianus one of his Friends, for the loss of two Daughters, of his Wife and Estate, and for the Discontents occasioned by his Son-in-Law, he adviseth him to give himself to God, and embrace a monastical Life: This Letter is writ∣ten from the Solitudes of Bethlehem about the Year 408.

In the Thirty third, he exhorteth Exuperantius to forsake the Wars, and the World, and to withdraw himself with his Brother Quintillian to Bethlehem.

The Thirty fourth is to his Aunt Castorina, with whom he had had some difference, he intreats her by this Letter to be reconciled to him, this Letter was in all probability written during S. Jerom's first retreat, and since he tells her, that he had written to her the year before upon the same Sub∣ject, this must be of the Year 373, or 374.

The Five and thirtieth was written at the same time. He prays Julian the Deacon to send him News of his own Countrey, and gives him thanks for sending word, that his Sister continued in the resolution not to Marry.

The Thirty sixth to Theodosius and the other Monks, was written by S. Jerom, after his quit∣ting the Desart of Syria in 374. where those Monks dwelt. He desires them to pray, that God would call him back into the Desart.

The Thirty seventh to the Virgins dwelling upon Mount Hermon, is written from the Desart of Syria, about the Year 373. He complains that they had not answered the Letters that he had written to them.

The Eight and thirtieth is certainly not S. Jerom's, and there is nothing in it worth Obser∣vation.

In the Thirty ninth he invites Rufinus Presbyter of Aquileia, who was then in Egypt, to come to him in his Solitude of Syria, where he was alone with Evagrius only, after the going away of Heliodorus, and the Death of Innocent and Hylas. This Letter is of 373, or 374.

The Fortieth, Forty first, Forty second, and Forty third, are very near of the same time, they are writ∣ten to his old Friends at Aquileia. The First to Niceas Deacon of that Town, the Second to Chro∣matius, Eusebius, and Jovinus: The Third to Chrysogonus a Monk of Aquileia: and the last to another Monk called Anthony. These are of no great Consequence.

The Forty fourth to Rusticus is more useful. He exhorts that Man to do Penance, urging several places of Scripture touching Repentance. He invites him to visit the Holy places. This Letter is not of the same Stile with the rest of this Father's Letters.

The Forty fifth Letter is a biting Satyr against Virgins and Women, who dwelt with Clergy Men that were not of their Kindred.

The Six and fortieth is a Declamation against Sabinianus a Deacon, whose Life had been dis∣orderly both in his own Countrey and at Bethlehem. These Three last are written from the Soli∣tude of Bethlehem. The year is uncertain.

The Seven and fortieth is an Historical Narrative of a Woman of Vercelle, who having been falsly accused of Adultery, and condemned to die, tho' she constantly denied the Fact, was tor∣tured seven times, but could not be put to Death. The Stile of this Letter is florid and childish, tho' S. Jerom writ it when he was well in years.

The Life of S. Paul the first Hermite, is one of S. Jerom's first Works. This man at Fifteen years of Age withdrew himself into the Desarts of Thebais, when Valerian and Decius persecuted the Church, fearing his want of strength to resist the Temptation. He spent there the rest of his Life, which lasted 113 years. S. Jerom gives an account of the manner of his being visited by S. Anthony, and describes several Circumstances of that History that are very hard to be believed.

The Life of S. Hilarion is full of Miracles of that Holy Anchorete S. Anthony's Disciple. S. Je∣rom places it in his Catalogue, amongst those Books which he wrote after his Return from Rome to Bethlehem. Likewise he makes mention there of the History of a Monk in the Desart of Chalcis called Malchus, who having quitted the Monastery to return into his Countrey, was taken and carried away Captive by the Saracens.

This Volume endeth with his Book o•• the Famous men, or Ecclesiastical Writers, written in Latin by S. Jerom, and translated into Greek, as it is supposed, by Sophronius n 1.95. He did it at the request of Flavius Dexter, Praefectus Praetorio, in imitation of Suetonius, and other profane Authors, who writ the Lives of Philosophers, and other Famous men. He confesses that Euse∣bius his Books did him much Service: He intreats the Authors of his own time, whom he doth not mention, not to take it ill; he declares that he did not intend to conceal their Works, but that they had never come to his hands; but however, if their Writings make them Famous, his silence will not long prejudice them. Lastly, he observes that this Treatise confounds Celsus, Por∣phyry, Julian, and the other sworn Enemies of the Church, who reproached it as having no Philoso∣phers,

no Orators, or learned Men; by proving to them that it was established, upheld and a∣dorned by very great Men. This Book comprehends the Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Authors, and Writers, from Jesus Christ to S. Jerom's time. It concludes with a Catalogue of the Works which this Father had composed to the Fourth year of the Emperor Theodosius, which is the Year 392, of Jesus Christ.

The Second Tomb, which is in the same Volume contains the Letters, or rather the Dis∣courses of Dispute and Controversie.

The First is his Treatise against Helvidius, of the perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. That man had written a Book wherein he pretended to shew by Testimonies of the New Testa∣ment, and the Opinions of some ancient Fathers, that after the Birth of Christ the Virgin Mary had Children, by Joseph her Husband. The first passage of Scripture which Helvidius cites for his Opinion is that of S. Matthew, ch. 1. The Virgin being espoused was found with Child, before Joseph and she came together: Helvidius concluded from this place, that therefore they came together afterwards. S. Jerom answers him, That this Consequence doth not follow, because that a thing is often said to have been done before another, which other is never to be done: and that when it is said such a one died before Penance, it doth not follow, that he, of whom this is spoken, does Penance in the other World; so likewise from what S. Matthew saith, That she was found with Child before Joseph knew her, it doth not follow, that he knew her after she was with Child. The Second passage quoted by Helvidius is another of the same Evangelist, Joseph knew not his Wife till she had brought forth her Son; Helvidius concludes from this passage as from the former, therefore he knew her after she was delivered. He maintained that the word until always signifyed in Scripture a fixed time, after which the thing would come to pass. S. Jerom shews him, that tho' this is often true, yet there are several passages where it signifies an unli∣mited time, as it is said of God, I am, till you are grown old, or until that, which can never de∣scribe the Term, or the end of God's existence, seeing he is for ever. And when Jesus Christ saith in the Gospel, I am with you to the end of the World; it were ridiculous to conclude, Wherefore he will be no more after the World's end.

Helvidius's Third Objection is grounded on the Title of First Born given to Jesus Christ, Luk. ch. 2. S. Jerom affirms, that it doth not suppose that he had younger Brethren, for in the Lan∣guage of the Scripture, every Child of the first lying in of a Woman is called First-born, these words being Synonymous, Adaperiens vulvam and Primogenitum, as appears. Numb. 18. Exod. 13. Levit. 12. Luk. 2.

The last Objection is taken from what is said in Scripture that Jesus Christ had Brethren; now among his Brethren, said Helvidius, are reckoned S. James, and Joses Son of Mary: as it is said, Matt. 27. Mark 15. Luk. 24. That Mary the Mother of James and Joses was present at the Passion, and at the Burial of Jesus Christ, but this Mary, said he, is the Mother of the Lord; for it is not likely, that she should forsake him upon that occasion. S. Jerom answers, that it is very certain by S. John's Testimony, that Mary the Mother of God was near the Cross of Jesus Christ at his Passion, since he recommends her to that Evangelist; but that Mary the Mother of James, and Joses is different from the Mother of the Lord, seeing that of the two Apostles called James, one was Son of Zebedee, and the other of Alpheus. But it cannot be said that the Lord's Mother was married to either of these two Persons. He maintains then, that Mary the Mother of James and Joses was the Wife of Alpheus, and Sister to the Mother of our Lord, and is also called Mary Cleophe. The Conjecture not being very certain, S. Jerom gives this general Answer, That the word Brother is equivocal, and is taken Four ways, a Brother by Nature, by Nation, by Rela∣tion, and by Affection; but sticks to the Brother-hood by Blood, shewing by several places of Scripture, that Cousins, and near Kindred are called Brethren.

Having thus with much Wit and Learning, refuted the false Consequences that Helvidius drew from those passages of the New Testament: S. Jerom opposes to Tertullian, and Victorinus whom Helvidius had quoted, the Authority of S. Ignatius, S. Polycarp, S. Irenaeus, S. Justin, and other ancient Apostolical Authors, who had written against the Hereticks Ebion, Theodorus of Byzantium, and Valentinus, whom S. Jerom pretends to have been of Helvidius his Opinion. But the Error of those Hereticks was far more intolerable, and we do not read that the Fathers quo∣ted by S. Jerom, did precisely refute Helvidius's Error. However S. Jerom rejects Tertullian's Authority, by saying, That he was not of the Church; and as for Victorinus Patarionensis, he saith, That his Testimony hath no greater difficulty than that of the Scripture, since he speaks of Christ's Brethren, but does not say that they were the Sons of Mary. In the latter part of this Discourse, he speaks like an Orator of the inconveniencies of Marriage, and the Advantages of Virginity. This Treatise was composed at Rome, about the Year 383.

In his Treatise against Jovinian, he further defends the Excellency of Virginity. This Jovi∣nian had asserted in a small Discourse published at Rome, That Widows and married Women were not to be less regarded than Virgins, if they have the same Vertues; This was the first Er∣ror of this man. The Second was, That a Christian baptized could not fall from Righteousness. The Third, That Abstinence from certain Meats was unprofitable: The last, That the glorified Saints are all equally Happy. S. Jerom refutes the first of these Errors in the first Book. He ex∣plains at first S. Paul's Notions concerning Marriage and Virginity; afterwards he takes notice of the Examples of the Old and New Testament, which Jovinian had brought to prove, that the

greatest Saints and most excellent men of all Ages had been Married. S. Jerom shews that he has multiplied those Examples too much: He affirms that the Apostles left their Wives, after their Call to the Apostleship, and that S. John being called before he was Married, always lived in Celi∣bacy: He answers those places of Scripture alledged by Jovinian, and discourses of the Celibacy of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. He condemns second Marriages with much severity, and produces several Examples of Heathen Women that either kept their Virginity, or continued in Widow-hood.

In the second Book he refutes Jovinian's other errours. He shews against the second, that the holiest of Men may fall from Baptismal Grace. Against the third, that tho' God is the Cre∣ator of all things fit for Man's use, yet it is good to fast, and use abstinence, and that it is very dangerous to indulge one's Senses, and satisfie greediness. Lastly, that as there are various degrees of Vice, and Vertue here in this life, so there are likewise in the other several degrees of felicity and pain. These Books were not compleated by S. Jerom when he writ his book of famous men tho' he mentions these two books there: and so they are of the year 392.

These Books being published at Rome, several persons found fault with the hard terms which S. Jerom made use of in speaking of Marriage. Pammachius having sent word of it to S. Jerom hint∣ing withall at the principal Passages excepted against. This Father expounds them in the apology directed to him, declaring that it was never his intention to condemn Matrimony.

He found himself obliged a second time to defend himself from the same accusation against a Monk; and this he does in the Letter intituled the fifty first to Domnion.

The fifty second Letter to Pammachius was joyned to the apology directed to him. He thanks him for securing the Copies of his Books against Jovinian; but he tells him that it was impossible to suppress them: that he had not the good fortune to be able always to correct his own Works, as some had; because he had no sooner composed them, but they were made publick even against his Will. He insults over those that found fault, challenging them to write against him. He ad∣viseth him to read the Commentaries of Dionysius, Rheticius, Eusebius, Apollinarius, and Didymus, who expounded that passage of the Epistle to the Corinthians, and spoke in the behalf of Virginity more powerfully than himself. He sends him Word, that he had Translated out of the Hebrew, the Books of the Prophets, of Job, and that he had written Commentaries upon the twelve Minor Prophets, and upon the Book of Kings. He observes that if his Translation of Job be compared with the Greek, and the old Latin Version, there will be found such a difference as is betwixt truth and falshood.

The fifty third Letter is directed to Riparius a Presbyter in Spain, who desired to know his opinion of a Book of Vigilantius a Presbyter of Barcelona; who condemned the Veneration of Re∣licks, and the Worship of Saints. S. Jerom exclaims against that errour, and prayeth Riparius to send him his Book that he might refute it at large, and this he does with great earnestness in the Treatise that followeth this Letter, written two years after, as he himself affirms. He taxeth Vigilantius, with reviving Jovinian's errours, and wonders that any Bishops should be of his mind. If, saith he, the name of Bishops may be given to such as will Ordain no Deacons, except they are Married: what will the Churches of the East, those of Egypt, and even of the See of Rome, which do not admit into the Clergy any but such as are unmarried, or who, being married profess to live as if they were not?

Having made this occasional remark concerning the celibacy of Clarks, he particularly under∣takes Vigilantius's errour about Relicks and the Invocation of Saints. This Man maintained that the Bones of the dead were not to be honoured, and that the Saints could not hear our Prayers. S. Jerom puts himself into a great heat to prove the contrary, and falls upon Vigilantius with a great deal of reproachful Language. In that Treatise he likewise defends the Festivals of Saints, the Solemnities practised upon their Eves, Pilgrimages to Jerusalem, the Monastick State, and the use of lighted Torches only in the Night; for he owns, that in his time they lighted none in the Day. We, saith he, do not light Torches in the day time, as you accuse us, but only in the Night, that their Light may afford joy and comfort in the Obscurity of the Night. This Treatise was written long after the Book of famous Men, about the year 406.

The fifty fourth Letter to Marcella, is against the errours of the Disciples of Montanus. He not only lays them open, but accuseth them, 1. Of owning but one person in God. 2. Of condemning second Marriages, as adulterous. 3. Of holding the obligation to keep three Lents. 4. That they did not acknowledge Bishops to be the Apostle's Successors, and the first of the Hierarchical Order, but that there were two degrees of Persons above them. 5. That they were very rigid in imposing of Penances, and never granted Absolution. 6. That they believed the prophecies of Montanus, Prisca, and Maximilla. Lastly he says that they were accused of celebrating Criminal Mysteries with the Blood of a Martyred Child; but declares that he had rather believe that this was not true. This Letter is written about the year 400.

In the fifty fifth Letter to Riparius, he says that Ruffinus, whom he calls his Catiline, had been expelled out of Palaestine.

In the fifty sixth he commends Apronius for opposing the errors of the Origenistes, and invites him to come to Jerusalem, Both these Letters are written under the Pontificate of Anastasius, about the year 400.

The two following Letters are written to Pope Damasus, out of the Desarts of Syria. S. Jerom asks his advice, what he should do about the disputes then in the East. I am, saith he, tyed to your Holiness's Communion, that is to S. Peter's Chair; I know that the Church is founded upon that Rock. Whosoever eateth the Lamb out of that House, is a prophane Man. Whosoever is not found in that House shall Perish by the Flood. But forasmuch as being retired into the Desart of Syria, I cannot receive the Sacrament at your hands, I follow your Collegues the Bishops of Egypt: I do not know Vitalis; I do not communicate with Meletius; Paulinus is a stranger to me. He that gathereth not with us, scattereth. He gives an account afterwards of the occasion of those Divisions. After the decision of the Council of Nice, after the Decree of the Council of Alexandria, enacted with the con∣sent of both the Eastern and Western Bishops, they yet ask of me that am a Roman a new Confession of Faith, to acknowledge three Hypostases. It is an Arian Bishop, and the Montanists who require that of me..... We ask what signifies this Word Hypostasis, they say, that it signifies a subsisting per∣son; we answer that if it be so, we are of that opinion; They are not satisfied with our professing that Sence, but they require further that we own these Terms. There must be some Poyson hid under these words. We say openly, if any one owns not three subsisting Persons, let him be Anathema; but because we do not use the Terms which they require we are accused of being Hereticks..... Order me if you please what I should do, I will not be afraid to say, that there are three Hypostases, if you command me so to do. Yet he is afterwards of opinion, that this way of speaking is not to be approved of, be∣cause the Term Hypostasis is for the most part equivalent to that of Substance.

The fifty eighth Letter to Damasus is much upon the same Subject, and he asks his advice with whom he ought to communicate, Meletius, Paulinus, or Vitalis. These Letters are of 374.

The following Treatise is a Dialogue betwixt an Orthodox Christian and a Disciple of Lucifer Calaritanus. This Man defends the Conduct and Opinions of those of his Sect, main∣taining, that those are not to be owned as Bishops that Communicated with the Arian Bishops, and that such as were Baptized by Hereticks ought to be Baptized again. The Orthodox Christian affirms the contrary. S. Jerom introduces the Orthodox Christian relating the History of the Council of Ariminum, and the dissentions that troubled the Church, and shewing that it was a rea∣sonable thing to Pardon those Bishops that had been surprized. There is in that Treatise a curious pas∣sage about Tradition, which he proves by the custom of imposing of Hands, and the Invocation of the Holy Ghost, after the administration of Baptism. He adds, That many other things are observed in the Church upon the account of Tradition without being authorized by a written Law; as, saith he, the dipping of the Head three times in Water at Baptism, the giving Milk and Honey to the Bapti∣zed: not bowing the Knee upon Sundays, nor all the time betwixt Easter and Whitsontide. The Luciferian advances this Proposition; and the Orthodox Christian agrees to it, confessing that the Bishop alone lays his Hands upon the Baptized, to cause the Holy Ghost to come down upon them: that he only conferrs the Sacrament of Confirmation. But he says that this Custom was introduced rather for the honour of the Priesthood, than through any necessity; That however the Holy Ghost descends upon them that are Baptized tho' they receive not the imposition of hands from the Bishop. This Treatise was written at Rome about the year 384.

The 59th. Letter to Avitus, contains any numeration of those errours which S. Jerom had found in the Books of Origen's Principles, Translated by Rufinus; which Pammachius had sent him ten years since: which shows that it was written about the year 407.

The 60th. is a Translation of S. Epiphanius's Letter to J. of Jerusalem, concerning the Ordination of Paulinianus, whom S. Epiphanius had ordained Deacon and Priest, in a Monastery of S. Jerom's, which John of Jerusalem pretended to be under his jurisdiction. This Letter is very cunningly written. He complains of the anger which John of Jerusalem had shewed for that ordination, representing to him that such behaviour was contrary to the Spirit of the Church; and that instead of being angry that he had ordained a Priest in a Monastery of strange Monks that were not of his Diocess, he ought to show much satisfaction, because there ought to be no Dissention among Priests, when no other thing is aimed at but the good of the Church.

That though all Bishops have every one their Church committed to their Charge, and whereof they ought to take Care, and that no Man is to Incroach upon another's Jurisdiction, yet Christian Charity which hath no Bounds is to be preferred in all things; and that the Action is not to be considered in its self, but respect ought to be had to the Circumstances of Time, Place, Persons, and Occasions.

He urges af∣terwards such things as might excuse his Ordination by saying, that there being but two Priests in their Monastery, Jerom and Vincentius, who would not perform any Function of their Mi∣nistery, he thought it his Duty to give them a Priest; and having met with Paulinianus, who so declined the Priesthood, that John could not seize upon him to put him into Orders, he cau∣sed him to be taken by Force and Ordain'd a Deacon: and that afterwards he Ordained him Priest against his Will, when he waited at the Altar, and that however the Ordination was per∣formed in a Monastery and not in a Parish of his Diocess. He adds that the Bishops of Cyprus, were much more simple, and careless in the Sence of John of Jerusalem; for they were so far from finding Fault, that their Fellow-Bishops Ordained out of their Diocesses, those Persons that declined the Priesthood; That on the contrary they Exhorted them to do it. He speaketh next against Origen's Errors, and desireth John of Jerusalem to Condemn them. He reduceth them to Eight principal Heads, which are these. 1. That the Son of God does not see his Father, and that the

Holy Ghost doth not see the Son. 2. That Men's Souls were sent from Heaven to the Earth for their Sins, and shut up in Bodies as in so many Prisons. 3. That the Devils shall repent one day of their Faults, and shall reign with the Saints in Heaven. 4. That Adam and Eve had no Flesh before they committed sin: and that the Skins wherewith they are said to have been covered, signifie their Bodies. 5. That man shall not rise again with Flesh and Bones. 6. That the earthly Paradise is to be understood Allegorically. 7. That the Waters, which the Scri∣pture speaks of above the Firmament, are the Angels, and that those which are said to have been under the Earth are the Devils. 8. That by sin Man lost the Image of God. The latter part of this Letter is concerning a Veil whereon was painted the Image of a Man, which S. Epi∣phanius had found in a Countrey Church near Jerusalem, and had caused it to be torn in Pieces, * 1.96 because he condemned that Practise as contrary to the Custom of those times. We have shewed in another place, that this Letter was truly written by S. Epiphanius in 392, and translated by S. Jerom in 393.

John of Jerusalem seeing himself thus accused by S. Epiphanius, made an Apology, which he sent to Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria, and caused it to be published every where, and chiefly in the West. Pammachius having seen it at Rome, wrote to S. Jerom, to let him know that Men were divided about that matter, and desired him to write to him about it. S. Jerom did not de∣ferr to put Pen to Paper, and directed to him in 393. the Sixty first Letter, wherein he observes, that S. Epiphanius having by his Letter, laid Eight Articles of Origen's Errors to John of Jerusa∣lem's Charge, he had justified himself but from Three, without so much as mentioning the other Five. Those three Articles are about the knowledge of the Son of God, the Pre-existency of Souls, and the quality of Bodies after the Resurrection. As to the first head John of Jerusalem had cleared himself, by declaring that he was no Arian; but S. Jerom pretends that he had not justified Origen. He had explained his Opinion very obscurely upon the Second and the Third. S. Jerom relates Origen's Opinion upon those three Articles, and refutes them with much Earnestness. Then he en∣larges upon the Quarrel betwixt S. Epiphanius and John of Jerusalem: He complains, that the latter had addressed himself to Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria; and that he had said in the beginning of his Apology, that he was charged with the care of all the Churches.

You, saith he, directing his Discourse to John of Jerusalem, who make your boast of following the Rules of the Church, and observe the Canons of the Council of Nice, and go about to appropriate to your self the Clergy that depend upon other Bishops, tell me I pray, Is Palaestine under the Jurisdiction of the Bishops of Alexandria? If I mistake not, it was decided in the Council of Nice, that Caesarea was the Metropolis of Palaestine, and Antioch of all the East. You ought therefore either to send to the Bishop of Caesarea with whom you knew, we Communicated; or if a Judge was to be sought for further off, you might have sent your Letters to Antioch. But I guess what it was that kept you from sending to Caesarea, or Antioch; I perceive what you were afraid of, and were willing to avoid: You chose rather to apply your self to a pre-ingaged Person, than to yield your Metropolitan that deference which you owe him.

After that he accuseth Isidore, whom Theophilus had sent to the place to inform himself of the state of things, of being cor∣rupted by John of Jerusalem, of following his Passion, and declaring absolutely for him; of be∣ing concerned in Composing the Apology, and then undertaking to carry it himself.

So that, saith he, He that dictated the Letter was he that carried it.

At last S. Jerom says, That the Original of that Quarrel was not Paulinianus's Ordination, but the accusing of Origen's Er∣rors. And this he lets forth speaking against John of Jerusalem with all possible Vehemency. By this Letter it appears, that both S. Jerom, and the other Monks of Palaestine had great Dif∣ferences with him.

But lest Theophilus perswaded by John of Jerusalem's Letter, should come to espouse his In∣terest, S. Jerom directs the Sixty second Letter to him, in defence of his own Cause. This Bi∣shop had sent him a Letter by Isidore, whereby he exhorted him to Peace. S. Jerom declares in his Answer, That he was desirous of nothing more; but that such as could alone procure it, were con∣tented only to make a show of being for it. That the Peace which he would have, was a true Peace, the Peace of Jesus Christ, a Peace without Enmity, a Peace without War. That there could be no Peace, when one would usurp Dominion and Empire, when he Excommunicated true Catholicks, when Men were forced to communicate with an Heretick, and to receive the Body of Jesus Christ at his hands, and when violence was used. These things he Charges upon John of Jerusalem, and complains of the injurious Treatment wherewith he uses him in his Let∣ter. And as for that which John of Jerusalem upbraided him withal, that he had formerly translated Origen's Books, which this Author so much condemns; Now he answers, That he was not the only Man that did it: that before him S. Hilary the Confessor had done it: but that imi∣tating him he had expunged what was dangerous in those Writings, and translated what was good and useful; and however he had always commended Origen for his Ability in expounding the Scriptures, yet he had always condemned him for his Errors. That he owned there was a vast-dif∣ference betwixt the Apostles Writings, and those of other Ecclesiastical Writers, since the former wrote nothing but what was true, whereas the latter were sometimes deceived. Afterwards he justifieth the Ordination of his Brother Paulinianus, saying, That S. Epiphanius did not ordain him in the Diocess of John of Jerusalem, since the Monastery where that Ordination was performed, be∣longed to the Diocess of Eleutheropolis, and not to that of Jerusalem: That he had done very ill

in asserting that S. Epiphanius had ordained a Child, since Paulinianus was then Thirty years old: That 〈◊〉〈◊〉 himself was not older when he was ordained Bishop.

S. ••er•••• having thus pleaded for himself, doth in his turn likewise accuse 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Jerusalem. He says, That this Bishop was the Author of all this trouble, and a Fomenter of the Division: that pretending to be for Peace, he prosecuted a cruel War: That he requested, and obtained his Banishment. Here he crys out in this manner: The Church of Christ, saith he, was esta∣blished by sufferings, and shedding of Blood. Persecutions have increased it, and by Martyrdom it came to be Crowned. If our Enemies were not of this Disposition; if they had rather persecute than be persecuted; In this Countrey there are Jews and Hereticks of all sorts, and particularly in∣famous Manichees, who hindred them from falling upon these; Their Spleen is against us, we are the only Persons whom they intend to drive away.... One Monk, I speak it with grief, One Monk who boasteth of being the Bishop of an Apostolick See, threat••••th another Monk, defires he should be banished, and accordingly 'tis done; but God be praised, adds he, Monks are not frighted with Persecutions, they wait for the Blow without Trouble, and without offering to defend them∣selves. For every Monk being out of his own Country is also out of the World. What need is there of the Prince's Authority, or of written Orders? Let them give us the least Sum∣mons, and we will depart immediately, knowing what we are, and being perswaded that the Earth is the Lord's, and that Jesus Christ is not shut up in any place. He tells us of going to Rome to communicate with that Church, from which we seem to be separated; but this we need not do, we are as much in Communion with the Church of Rome in Palaestine as if we were at Rome, we communicate with its Priests which are in the Town of Bethlehem. At last S. Jerom profes∣ses that he is ready to be reconciled to John of Jerusalem, provided he would put on a charitable Spirit, and prove the same towards him as he had been before. We know, saith he, what we owe to the Bishops of Jesus Christ; but let them be contented with Honour and Respect, and know that they are Fathers and not Masters; and particularly with relation to those who despi∣sing Ambition, preferr rest and quietness before all other things.

After S. Jerom's 63d. Letter follows Ruffinus's Preface to his Translation of Origen's Principles. He saith in that Preface, That several persons desirous of learning the Holy Scriptures wished that Origen might be made to speak Latin: That his Collegue and Brother, S. Jerom, having translated two Homilies of this Author upon the Book of Canticles, had so much exalted him in his Preface, that Men were very desirous to see his Works: That he had given this advantageous Te∣stimony of him, That he exceeded all others in his Commentaries, but had surmounted himself in his Homilies upon the Book of Canticles: That this same S. Jerom had promised to translate the other Works of this Author, but he thought it afterwards more glorious to write himself and to be on Au∣thor rather than an interpreter. We therefore prosecute and compleat a thing which he has both approved and began, but we cannot render Origen's Words with the same Eloquence. And he adds, That this very thing had kept him from undertaking that Translation; but at last he yielded to Macarius's earnest Intreaties; however that in this Version he had followed the Rule of those who had translated that Author before him; and that he had imitated S. Jerom, by cutting off those things which seemed disagreeable to the Doctrine of the Church; and so much the rather, because in Origen's Works there were Notions quite contrary: That the Reason of that seeming Contradiction might be found in the Apology that Pamphilus had written for Origen, and which himself had translated; and that he pretended to shew, by undeniable Proofs, that Origen's Works had been corrupted in several places by Hereticks or Men of ill designs; and that for this very Reason he had either omitted or altered in the Translation of that Treatise, those Arti∣cles wherein he seemed to speak otherwise than he did in his other Books. This Preface was writ∣ten in 397. when Rufinus published his Version of the Books of Origen's Principles at Rome.

It was no sooner published, but Oceanus and Pammachius sent it to S. Jerom, observing that they had found still some Errors there, notwithstanding that great part was expunged: intreating him, that to secure them in the Truth, he would make a Faithful Translation of that Work. The Note which they writ to him about that Business, is the sixty fourth Letter.

S. Jerom thinking himself indirectly affronted by Rufinus's Preface, intimating that he had for∣merly commended Origen, which might insinuate that he then approved his Errors, and approved them still, fell instantly to writing, to let the World know in what Sence he had commended Origen: He owns that he did it in two places of his Works, namely, in the Prologue of his Trans∣lation of the Homilies upon the Canticles, dedicated to Damasus, and in the Preface to his Trea∣tise of Hebrew Names. But he affirms, that in both these places, he had not spoken either of his Doctrine or of his Opinions. I have commended him, saith he, as an able Interpreter, and not as a man whose Dogm's ought to be followed; I have admired his Parts without approving his Doctrine, I have valued his Philosophy, and not his Preaching. He adds, That if any man would know what his Opinion has always been concerning Origen's Books, let him but read his Commentaries upon Ec∣clesiastes, and his three Volumes upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, whereby it will appear that he hath constantly contradicted Origen's Opinions. Huetius is not perfectly satisfied with this Excuse of S. Jerom: He says that it doth not appear by the Commentaries which he citeth, that he hath contradicted Origen's Notions, tho' he hath filled them with that Author's Dogm's without quoting him. If he believed them false, says he, ought he not to have censured them? Why did he not think it an Honour to Copy them, as he affirms in the Preface to the second Book of his

Commentary upon the Prophet Micah? Why hath he asserted in his Preface to the Book of Hebrew Names, That none but an ignorant man could deny that Origen was one of the Masters of the Church, after the Apostles.

These Reasons made Huetius say, That Rufinus was in the right in accusing S. Jerom of being an Origenist, and upbraiding him in his first Invective, that the Name of a Master of the Church cannot be given to an Heretick; that S. Jerom's Excuse is pitiful; that Rufinus thoroughly proves that he commended Origen's Doctrine; and that at last this Father is obliged to confess that his Opinions were altered as to Origen: That Sulpi∣tius Severus had a great deal of Reason to find fault, that S. Jerom having at first followed Origen, did of a sudden condemn all his Works: That S. Augustin did justly accuse him of Inconstancy and Lightness; and that Pope Pelagius the II. is not to be blamed for putting him amongst Origen's Disciples.

That, in a word, tho' this Holy Doctor acted the part of good Catholick in abjuring Origen's Errors after he had owned them; yet it were to be wished he had been more constant and moderate, and that he had not so much indulged the Motions of his in∣flamed Choler, so as to be carried away unto contrary Notions, according to the different Circum∣stances of Time, and outrageous railing against the greatest Men of his Age. For this must be acknowledged, that Rufinus reproved him often with Reason, and that he often blamed Rufinus without Ground. This is the Judgment which the Learned Huetius, now nominated to the Bi∣shoprick of Soissons, doth with much Reason and Justice make of the Parts and Conduct of S. Jerom. I willingly subscribe to it, and do not doubt but that as many as have ever read this Father, will be of the same Mind. * 1.97.

And now to return to our Subject: S. Jerom going on to justifie himself of those things which they reproached him withal, namely, of commending Origen, sets forth some Examples of great Men that might be commended for their Learning, who did hold very remarkable Errors.

S. Cyprian, saith he, took Tertullian for his Tutor, as appears by his Writings, and yet did not approve the Dreams of Montanus and Maximilla as he did. Apollinarius hath written very convincing Books against Porphyrius; and Eusebius writ a most useful History of the Church. The former erred concerning the Mystery of the Incarnation, and the latter defends the Opinions of Arius.

He owns that he was Apollinaris's Disciple, Didymus's Scholar, yea, that he hath had a Jew for his Master; that he collected carefully all Origen's Works, and read them exactly, but affirms, that he never followed his Errors. Lastly, to make short, he saith, that if he may be believed, he never was an Origenist, and that tho he had been, yet now he ceaseth to be so. Upon this Principle he exhorts others to imitate him, and to condemn his Errors; after that, he gives Origen high Commendations, rejecting his Opinions. He refutes what Rufinus had asserted, that the Errors which were found in Origen's Works had been added; and laughs at the Liberty which he had taken to expunge what he thought fit. Last of all, he affirms, that the first Book of the Apology for Origen, which bore the Name of Pamphilus, was not that Martyrs, but Didymus's, or at least some other Author's. This Letter is written near 150 years after O∣rigen's Death, that is, in the year 399.

The Sixty sixth Letter to Rufinus, wherein he complains of his Preface, is written at the same time. He speaks to him as to a person with whom he would not quite fall out; he telleth him, that he knew not with what Spirit he writ that Preface, but that all the World saw how it was to be understood; that he might have been even with him, by commending him after the like malicious Manner, but that he chose rather to justify himself of the Crime laid to his Charge than offend his Friend; that he intreated him to cite him no more after the same manner; that he undertook to write to him about it as to his Friend, rather than to ingage with him publickly. To let him know that he would do nothing that might check that sincere Reconciliation which he had made with him, he exhorts him on his part to do the same, least, saith he, that biting one another we do not mutually consume one another.

Rufinus, who was not of a Temper to lie still without replying, immediately put pen to Paper to write against S. Jerom. Paulinianus, who was then in the West, having found a Way to get the Extracts of Rufinus his Book before it was quite published, sent them to his Brother, who besides was informed by Pammachius and Marcellinus, of the principal Heads contained in Rufinus's Answer, and so he composed immediately his first Apology divided into two Books.

In the First he answers Rufinus's Calumnies. The First was, that he had translated into Latin the Books of Origen's Principles without altering.

S. Jerom answers that he did it, to show the falsity of Rufinus his Translation, and to shew Origen's Errors, and so his Translation could hurt no body, since it appeared that it was made only to condemn the Errors of that Book.

To justifie Origen's Doctrine about the Trinity, Rufinus had quoted the First Book of Pam∣philus's Apology. S. Jerom affirms, that it was not composed by that Martyr.

Rufinus laid before him the Praises which he had given to Origen. He answers as he did before, that he had commended his Learning but not his Doctrine, as he had commended Eusebius and Apollinaris without approving their Errors.

Rufinus charged him with publishing Errors, and Contradictions in his Commentaries. He says that he did it without approving of them; that he has collected in his Commentaries, the Notions and Words of others, observing that some understood those passages in one Sence, and others in another, that so the prudent Reader may chuse what is truth, and reject what is false; and that in this Case none can Tax him with Errors, and Contradictions, who barely relates the Notions, and different Expositions of others. This he proves by the Example of the ablest Commentators of profane Authors.

Rufinus had found fault, that he had variously translated the Twelth Verse of the second Psalm, where the vulgar Translation saith, Embrace the Discipline, by rendring it according to the Hebrew, sometimes worship the Son, sometimes worship ye only. S. Jerom tells him, That he had kept to the Sence rather than to the Letter, translating the Hebrew word Nashecu, which signi∣fieth, Kiss or Embrace, by this term Worship ye; That as to the other word Bar, which hath several Significations, (for it signifies the Son, or a handful of pickt Ears of Corn,) he had followed the former Signification in his Commentary, and that in his Version, to prevent the Jews accu∣sing Christians of falsifying the Holy Scripture, he adher'd to the latter Signification, which both Aquila and Symmachus followed.

Rufinus found fault likewise with several passages in S. Jerom's Commentary upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, in which he had abridged the Commentaries of Origen. S. Jerom defends himself, by saying that he produced Origen's Opinions without approving of them, since he observes at the same time, that those Explications were not his own.

Lastly Rufinus upbraided S. Jerom, that he was naturally given to Calumniating, and speaking evil of every Body: That he reproved other Mens works out of Envy: Yea, he laid Perjury to his Charge; because having protested before the Judgment Seat of Christ (as he says in his Book of the Instruction of Virgin's,) that he would read no more the Books of profane Authors, yet it did appear, that he had not left off reading of them. S. Jerom justifieth himself from the for∣mer Accusations; but as to the last he thinks it an Honour to follow the Study of learned Books, and declares, that whatsoever he hath said in the Treatise concerning the Instruction of Virgins, was only the Description of a Dream.

Towards the latter end of this Letter, he asserts that what he had said in the Eighty third Epistle to Oceanus, That Baptism remits all Sins, that it blots out even the very spot of Bigamy: So that a Man might be ordained after a second Marriage, if the former was before Baptism. This De∣cision is contrary to that of Pope Innocent I.

S. Jerom having thus pleaded for himself against Rufinus's accusations, answers the Apology which he had made to satisfie Pope Anastasius who had Condemned him, and to justifie himself of those things that they Reproached him withall. He made Profession of the Faith of the Church, and of the Mystery of the Holy Trinity at first. S. Jerom answers that this is not the Question, for now all Mankind was perswaded of that Principle concerning the Incarnation. S. Jerom asks him what he thought of the Soul of Christ, whether it was Created before or at the Moment of his Conception. He chargeth him that he did not speak plain enough about the Resurrection of the Body, and further he pretends that Rufinus did not sufficiently explain him∣self upon the Eternity of the Devil's punishment. Concerning the Origination of the Soul he had said that there were three different Opinions; Some held that one Soul begat another, as Tertul∣lian and Lactantius. Others that God Created them after the Forming of the Body, and so they came in by Infusion; and lastly some imagined that they were made when God Created the World of nothing; that this was Origen's Opinion, and that of some other Greeks: For his part, he was at no certainty about it, but left it to God, and to those to whom it should please God to Reveal it: But that he believed what the Church openly professed, that God was the Creator of Souls, and Bodies. S. Jerom torments himself much about the last Point, and tho' he doth not say that any of these three Opinions are decided, yet he enveigheth much against Rufinus, because he would not Condemn Origen's Opinion. He endeavours afterwards to Refute the Reasons which he alledg∣ed to justifie himself for Translating the Books of Origen's Principles: He finds fault that he should strike out some of the Errors and leave the rest. He answers those Conjectures which he brought to show that Origen's Books were Corrupted; and since he had asserted the same thing of the passages in the Works of the ancients, as in S. Clemens, Dionysius of Alexandria, and which did not seem to be agreeable to the Doctrine of the Church, of the Mystery of the Holy Trinity: He de∣nies that that can be reasonably said, observing that if such Conjectures may take place, the greatest Hereticks should thereby be easily excused, as Marcian, Manichaeus, Arius, Eunomius. But as Rufinus might have pressed upon S. Jerom by asking him, Why then were there any Er∣rors in their Works, and whether he would call them Hereticks upon that Account? S. Jerom

prevents that Objection by saying, That perhaps they were in an Error, or the expressions they made use of had another Sence, or their Works might be Corrupted by Transcribers; or lastly, that Writing before the Arian Heresie appeared, they did not take the necessary Precautions against it. When S. Jerom made these remarks, he did not consider, that Rufinus might use them to defend Origen, as he did to excuse the Ancients: and perhaps this way of justifying him had been more Solid than that which he made use of, by saying that those Errors had been added. This S. Jerom op∣poses with all his Might, and endeavours to show, that all the Examples of falsification of the Fa∣thers Works alledged by Rufinus, have no Relation to those that are supposed to be in Origen's Books. In the rest of the Letter he justifies himself from that Calumny, that he blamed the Version of the Septuagint. He declares, that he was so far from Condemning it, that he had Corrected it himself, and spake much in its Commendation. But he asserts that this Translation was not Composed by the LXX in distinct Cells, and he defends those that have recourse to the Hebrew Text.

Rufinus was much surprized to see an Answer to a Book that was not yet published, and he Writ immediately to S. Jerom about it, and sent him withall an intire Copy of his first Answer. This Father who was not wont to leave any thing unanswered that was against him, wrote im∣mediately the third Book of his Apology, which contains nothing but Personal Quarrels, or Re∣petitions of what had been said before: which commonly proves the end of all disputes that con∣tinue long betwixt learned Men.

Pelagius having made his Errors publick. S. Jerom, who suffered no New Opinion in the Church to pass unpunished, fell upon him Vigorously in his Letter to Ctesiphon.

The first Maxim of Pelagius, which he opposes, is that of Apathy, that is, Freedom from Pas∣sions, which this Heretick thought Men could attain unto; and that having once got thus far, they might be without Sin.

The Second is concerning the Grace of Jesus Christ, whereof Pelagius denyed the Necessity, affirming that Mens Salvation depended upon the Power of their free Will. S. Jerom, as well as S. Augustin opposes this Error, by shewing the necessity of Prayer, and of good Works. If saith he, the Grace of Jesus Christ dependeth upon our Will, if we need only a free Will, and none other help is required, to what purpose should Prayer be made to God? Wherefore dowe endeavour to move his Clemency, and call upon him for Succour, to obtain daily that which is in our own Power?..... We must therefore remove fasting also and Continence: For why should I Labour to get that by my Indu∣stry, which always depends on my self? He adds that this Consequence follows so Naturally upon this Heretick's Principles, that one of his own Party could not forbear reasoning after this manner in a Commentary, saying; That if there is need of Foreign help to do good, then Liberty is destroy'd.

S. Jerom saith against this Error, That we have nothing but what is the Gift of God: That indeed it is Man's part to run and to will, but he hath need of God's assistance, to do it: That it is not enough, that God should once give us his Grace, he must give it Constantly: If we would obtain we must ask for it, and having obtained it, there is need of asking again: And yet this Grace does not destroy free-will, neither does it follow upon these Principles, that it is impossible to keep God's Commandments.

The Third Maxim of Pelagius refuted by S. Jerom in this Letter, is a Consequence of the former. He held, that Man could be perfect, and freed from Sin, without God's help. S. Jerom proves the contrary by several places of Scripture, which shew that Man cannot be delivered, but by the Grace of Jesus Christ. This Letter is of the Year 411.

He handleth the same Questions in the Dialogue against the Pelagians, where he introduces a Pelagian, under the Name of Critobulus, discovering and establishing his Errors; and a Catholick under the Name of Atticus confuting them particularly, by Testimonies of Holy Scripture. This Dialogue is divided into two Books, and was written some time after the Letter to Ctesiphon about the Year 415.

The Sixty seventh Letter is a Translation of a Letter from Theophilus to S. Epiphanius, whereby he desires that Bishop of Cyprus to assemble a Synod in that Island, to Condemn Origen, as he had done in Egypt. This Letter is of the Year 399.

The Sixty eighth is a Letter of S. Jerom's to Theophilus, who had sent him Word, that he should be exact in the observation of the Canons. S. Jerom thanks him for his admonition, and exhorts him to use his Authority against the Origenists, since Patience and Meekness could not reclaim them from their Error. This Letter is of the Year 398.

The Sixty ninth is from Theophilus to S. Jerom, giving him notice how he had driven away the Monks of Nitria who were accused of Origenism. S. Jerom returns him Thanks for that Noble Action by the Seventieth Letter. And he commends him again in the Seventy first Letter for what he had done against Origen. And in the last Place Theophilus acquaints him by the Seventy second that he had cleansed the Monasteries of Nitria of Origenism.

The Seventy third is from S. Epiphanius to S. Jerom, giving him notice of the Judgment given by Theophilus against Origen: and he sends him the Letter written by that Bishop, and prays him to Publish what he had written in Latin upon that Matter.

The Seventy fourth is a Note to Marcella.

The Seventy fifth is against Vigilantius, who had accused him of Origenism, he uses the same Arguments for his defence, that he had done in his other Letters, and treats Vigilantius very ill. This Letter was written, about the Year 397.

The Seventy sixth is of the same time. He repeats there what he had written in several places, that Origen deserves to be commended for his Learning, but that his Principles are not to be fol∣lowed.

The Seventy seventh to Mark the Presbyter was written by S. Jerom from the Desart of Syria, about the time when the Eastern Bishops tormented him, to oblige him to own Three Hypostases, about the Year 373.

The Seventy eighth to Pammachius and Marcella, is about Origen's Condemnation. He gives them an Account of what Theophilus had decreed. He sends them a Copy of his Letter, and the Acts of his Judgment, and desireth them to have it confirmed at Rome, by Pope Anastasius. This Letter is of 399.

The Seventy ninth is the last Letter of S. Jerom's, to S. Augustin. S. Jerom sent it by Innocent the Priest, who in the Year 419, was sent from Africa into Egypt to look after the Copies of the Council of Nice. It is not directed to S. Augustin alone, but to him and Alypius. He con∣gratulates their overthrowing of Heresie, and tells them, That he had not had time yet to An∣swer what Anianus, Pelagius's Disciple had written against him, but he would doe it very soon if God gave him Life: He speaketh of Eustochium's Death, who was alive when Palladius wrote his Historia Lausiaca, in 419, which shews that this Letter was written in the Year 420.

The Eightieth Letter wherein he commends S. Augustin for the Resolution and Courage, where∣with he had opposed Pelagius's Heresie, was written some years before. He exhorts him to go on, praising him in this manner, You are commended in Rome; The Catholicks look upon you as the restorer of the ancient Faith, and what is yet a more honourable thing for you is, That the Here∣ticks hate you.

The Eighty first is a Note written about the time of his falling out with John of Jerusalem, after the Condemnation of the Origenists, about the Year 404.

In the Eighty second Letter, S. Jerom Answers the Question about the Origination of Souls, proposed to him by Marcellinus Governour of Africa. He does not decide the Question, but saith, That he had delivered his Opinion in his Books against Rufinus, and advises him to con∣sult S. Augustin, who would clear that Point to him: He adds, That he could not yet compleat the Commentary upon Ezekiel, because of the Barbarian's Incursions. This Letter is of the Year 410.

The Eighty third to Oceanus concerneth a Point of Discipline, whether a Person twice mar∣ried, but once before Baptism, is to be looked upon as a Bigamist, and so to be kept from sacred Orders: S. Jerom maintains the Negative with abundance of Wit.

In the Eighty fourth to Magnus, S. Jerom proveth by the Examples of S. Paul, and of the most famous Christian Authors, that a Christian Author, may, as he did, make use of prophane Examples, and prophane Authors. This Letter was composed about the Year 400. In this Let∣ter there is a Catalogue of almost all the Christian Authors to S. Jerom.

The Eighty fifth is an Invective against one who would have Deacons preferred before Priests. S. Jerom exalts the Priestly Dignity which seems too high, when he compares them with Bishops,

I am informed, saith he, that one was so impudent as to preferr Deacons before Priests: be∣fore Priests, I say, who may be compared with Bishops; For when S. Paul plainly teaches that Priests are Bishops, who can endure that those who serve Tables and Widows, should by Pride exalt themselves above those, who by their Prayers consecrate the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ?

Then he produces passages out of the Apostolical Epistles, where they give to meer Priests the Name of Bishops, and adds,

That it was to prevent Schism, that in Pro∣cess of time, one was chosen to be preferred before others, least every one presuming to ascribe to himself the Pre-eminence, the Church of Jesus Christ should be perpetually divided.

For, saith he, in the See of Alexandria, from S. Mark the Evangelist to the time of Heraclas and Dionysius, the Priests chose one of them, whom they placed in a Seat higher than the rest, and called him Bishop, much after the same manner, as an Army chuses an Emperior, or as Dea∣cons chuse one of themselves to make him Archdeacon: And indeed, what doth a Bishop doe, that is not done by a Priest, if you except Ordination? We are not to believe, that the Church is otherwise at Rome, than in other Cities of the world. Gauls, Britains, Africans, Persians, Indi∣ans, and all other Nations worship the same God, and have the same rule of Faith. If Authority be required, the World is bigger than a City. Let a Bishop be the Bishop of what Town you please, he is neither more or less a Bishop; whether of Rome, or Eugubium, whether of Constantinople or of Rhegium, Alexandria or Tunis, it is still the same Dignity, and the same Function. Power and Riches do not make a Bishop greater, Poverty and want of Credit do not render his Sta∣tion more vile. All Bishops are Successors of the Apostles. But, you will say, how cometh it to pass, that at Rome a Priest is not ordained, except a Deacon gives him his Testimonial? Why is the Custom of one only Town objected to me? Why is the small number of Deacons so exalted, as if that were the Law of the Church? All that is rare is most esteemed. The small number hath made Deacons valued, and the great number hath rendred Priests contemptible. However, Deacons stand before the Priests, even when the Priests are sate down, and this is observed even in the Church of Rome: Tho' I have seen a Deacon sitting in the same rank with Priests, in the absence of the Bishop, and give the Blessing in the Presence of the Bishop, such is now the Corruption of Manners! But let such as undertake these things know, that they are against Order; Let them hear these

words of the Apostle. It is not just that we should leave the word of God, to serve Tables; let them learn wherefore Deacons were established, let them read the Acts of the Apostles, and remember their condition. The Name of Priest or Presbyter denotes Age, and that of Bishop, Dignity; where∣fore in the Epistle to Timothy, mention is made of the Ordination of Bishops and Deacons, but not of that of Priests, because Priests are comprised under the Name of Bishops. Lastly, to shew that a Priest is above a Deacon, one needs only observe, that a Priest is made of a Deacon, but not a Deacon of a Priest.

This Letter was written after his going from Rome, the Year is not known, but it was in all probability about the Year 387. What he saith of Bishops, may have a good Sence, if we con∣sider his design in this place, which was to exalt the Dignity of the Priesthood, by comparing them with Bishops, not that he thought them equal in Dignity, since he positively excepteth the Power of Ordination, (and that of Confirmation in his Dialogue against the Luciforians:) but since Priests have a share in the Government of the Church, they may in that Sense be called Bishops. Like Expressions may be seen in S. Jerom's Commentary upon the Epistle to Titus, and in many Authors that have followed him.

The Eighty sixth is a Letter from S. Augustin, to S. Jerom, whereby he thanks him for the Answer to his, and intreats him in the Name of the whole African Church, to translate the Greek Authors that had writ Commentaries upon the Scripture. He says, That he was very desirous that S. Jerom would translate the Sacred Books after the same way, that he had translated Job, by setting down the differences of the Version of the LXX, which had great Authority in the Church. Now because S. Augustin did not understand Hebrew, he could not apprehend that there should be so much difference, betwixt the Hebrew Text, and the Translation of the LXX, and doth not approve of any departing from it. For, saith he to S. Jerom, either those passages are clear, or they are dark. If they are dark, you may be mistaken, as well as the Seventy; If they are clear, can any Man believe, that those learned Men did not understand them? This Letter which was writ∣ten about the Year 395, not being carried, S. Augustin wrote another to S. Jerom upon the same Subject in 397. But the Person to whom he had given it to deliver to S. Jerom, gave out some Copies of it which were spread in Rome, so that it was publick before S. Jerom saw it. This se∣cond Letter is here the Ninety seventh. S. Augustin asketh of S. Jerom the true Title of his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers; afterwards he reproves what S. Jorom had said, That S. Peter, and S. Paul, pretended to have a difference, tho' they were agreed. He pretends that this Opinion is of very great Consequence, and may have dangerous Effects, because if we admit of an officious Lye in the Holy Scripture, it seems to give Men a handle to doubt of all. He therefore exhorts him to alter that passage in his Commentary. At the latter end, he prays him to add to his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers, the Errors of some Hereticks of whom he speaks, or to make a Book purposely on that Subject. S. Augustin having no Answer, because neither of those two Letters were delivered to S. Jerom, wrote a Third by Cyprian the Deacon, wherein he requireth an Answer to the two former, adding in this, That he found fault with his writing a new Tran∣slation of the Bible, pretending that it would cause Disturbances and Scandals, if it were pub∣lickly read in the Church: as it really happened in a Church of Africk; where a Bishop having publickly read the Prophecy of Jonas, according to S. Jerom's Translation: the People hearing o∣ther Terms than they were wont to hear, accused their Bishop of falsifying the Scripture. This Letter was written some years after the foregoing, about the Year 403.

S. Jerom having received these Three Letters by Cyprian the Deacon, thought himself affron∣ted by S. Augustin's demands, and answered him with some Loftiness in the Eighty ninth Let∣ter. He repeats all the Questions that had been put to him by S. Augustin, and endeavours to give him Satisfaction. He telleth him, 1. About the Title of his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers, that it ought to be Entituled, the Book of Famous Men, or of Ecclesiastical Writers.

2. He defends his Exposition of S. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, about the Action of S. Peter, and S. Paul, by the Authority of Origen, Didymus and other ancient Authors, whose Commentaries he only translated, as he had said before in the Preface. That if he is in an Error, he had rather err with those Great men, than flatter himself with having the Truth only on his side. He adds Rea∣sons to Authority, shewing by the History of the Acts, That S. Peter could not but know, that Christians were freed from the Burden of the Law; That on the other side S. Paul had himself pra∣ctised that very thing whereof he here accuseth S. Peter, by observing the Ceremonies of the Law; from whence he concludes that both these Apostles, being of the same Opinion, had agreed to raise that small Dispute to instruct both Jews and Gentiles by that pious Artifice. Afterwards he refutes S. Augustin's Opinion, and strives to answer the Reasons which he had produced.

Last of all he gives him Reasons for the Notes, that were in his Translation of the Scripture. He answereth S. Augustin's reasoning, to prove that he had not done well in Translating the Bible a new, very pleasantly, by retorting the same upon him.

You cannot be ignorant, saith he, that the Psalms have been expounded by several Commentators, Greek and Latin, who wrote before you. Pray tell me, how you durst undertake to give a new Exposition of them, after those Great men? You believed that those places which you explained were either clear or obscure: If they were clear, it is probable (to use your own way of reasoning) that they did under∣stand them, and if they are obscure, and they did not well understand them, it may be thought that you might be mistaken as well as they.

And lastly, he makes himself sport with their Quarrelling with the good Bishop for reading his Translation of

Jonas, shewing that the occasion of it was ridiculous, because the Question was about one single word only, namely the term Gourd; which he had rendred Ivy. This Letter is of the Year 404.

S. Jerom being sometime without answering this Letter, S. Augustin wrote to him, that he was informed that he had received his Letters, and expected an Answer, and whereas there was a Discourse that he had sent a Book to Rome against S. Jerom, he assures him that he had not. This Letter is of the Year 402. It is here the Ninetieth.

S. Jerom in answer to it saith, That he saw a Letter wherein he reproved a passage of his Com∣mentary upon S. Paul, and advised him to retract it; but not being sure that this Letter was from him, he had not answered it yet, because he had been disturbed by the Sickness of Paula. Afterwards he upbraids him for the Liberty he had taken; and Taxes him with seeking after Glory, by attacking Great men, telling him that he ought to examine his own Strength, and not compare himself with a Man that was grown old in Studying the Holy Scripture, and much less provoke him to a Combat. And at last deals with him, as with one whom he did not much value, and whom he judged not worthy of his Anger. This Letter is of the Year 402.

The Ninety second is written by S. Jerom with the same Spirit. Again he complains that S. Au∣gustin's Letter was published. He writes him word, that his Friends said that he had not Acted in∣nocently in that particular, but seemed to go about to establish his own Glory, by the ruin of another Man's: That if he would Dispute, there were young and able Men at Rome of his own strength; As for himself, he might, like a Veteran Soldier commend the Victories of others, but not engage in the Fight; That he would not so much as read his Books to find fault; That he had seen nothing of his, but his Soliloquies, and some Commentaries upon the Psalms, and that if he would examine them, he could show him how he departed from the Exposition of ancient Authors. This Letter is of the Year 403.

S. Augustin having received both these Letters, answered him with much Civility and Mode∣ration, yet without subscribing to his Opinions. He speaks of the Quarrel which he had with Rufinus, and laments that Division, representing to him, that he had not shewed that Meekness and Charity which he might have done. This Letter is written very Artificially. It is the Ninety third. He directed it to Presidius, to see it conveyed to S. Jerom, as appears by the Ninety fifth.

S. Jerom contented with S. Augustin's Complements and Satisfaction, writ to him some time after the Ninety sixth Letter, whereby he excuses himself for having answered him, and tells him, that he earnestly desired there should be no more Disputes betwixt them.

S. Augustin having received this Letter by Firmus, returned an Answer by the Ninety seventh Letter, to what S. Jerom had written to satisfie his Requests, and defended his Opinions with great Clearness and Moderation. This Letter is here the Ninety seventh, and was written as well as the foregoing in the Year 403.

After this time there was no more said of the Questions that were betwixt them, and they never writ to one another but with Civility. This may be taken Notice of in the Letters we have already spoken of, and in the Ninety fourth, where S. Jerom thanketh S. Augustin, for Dedicating and sending to him, by Orosius, the Books concerning the Origination of Souls; and he tells him, That he spake honourably of him in the Dialogue, which he wrote against Pelagius. This Letter is of the Year 406.

The Ninety eighth is a Complement from S. Jerom to S. Augustin of the Year 397.

The Ninty nineth Letter to Asella was written by S. Jerom, at his going from Rome; he defends himself very warmly from the false Rumours, which his Calumniators had spread against him; because of the Familiarity which he had had at Rome with some Roman Ladies. This Letter he writ when he was Embarking to return into the East, in 385.

The Hundredth Letter is a Satyr against one Bonosus, who had taken, what S. Jerom had writ in general against all Vices, as particularly designed against himself, it is probably of the same time * 1.98 with the foregoing.

The Hundred and first to Pammachius, Concerning the best Method of translating, is about the Translation, which he made Two years before of S. Epiphanius's Letter to John of Jerusalem. He was accused of not having done it faithfully. To justifie himself, he proves by the Examples of the best Translators both Ecclesiastical and Prophane, that to translate well, one is not to follow the words, or terms, but the Sence and Conceptions of his Author. He saith, that this Treatise was composed Two years after the Translation of S. Epiphanus's Letter, of the Year 303, which shews that it is of 395.

In the Hundred and second to Marcella, he argues against those who accused him, of corrupting the Text of the Gospel, because he had corrected the faults of the Latin Translation according to the Greek Original; and he reproveth those that found fault with him, for blaming the Virgins frequenting Men's Company. This Letter was written likewise sometime after his Departure from Rome, in 385, or 386.

These are S. Jerom's Letters, and Treatises contained in the Second Volume.

The Third contains the Critical Letters and Works upon the Holy Scripture.

The First directed to Paulinus, is not upon that Subject only; for he exhorts him not only to the Reading of the Holy Scripture, but also to retire, and to vow Poverty. But the Principal Sub∣ject of that Letter is Precepts, and a Method which is to be observed both in Reading and understanding the Holy Scripture. He shews at first that no Man ought to enter upon that Study, without a Skilful Guide to shew him the Way. He complains that all other Arts, and Sciences, are exercised by none but Men of that Profession, but that every one pretends to be Skill'd in the understanding of the Scriptures.

To shew that Men are deceived, and that the Scripture is not so easily understood, as they ima∣gine, he reckons up the several Books, and takes notice of the great difficulty of finding the true Sence and Spirit of them, and he draws up in short very curious Observations upon every Book of the Scripture, and upon the Character of their Authours.

The Second Letter in Number one hundred and four to Desiderius, is a Preface to his Version of the Pentateuch. He sheweth how necessary, and withall how difficult it is to undertake it after the Translation of the LXX, and that this is defective.

The hundred and Fifth Letter is a Preface to the Book of Job.

The hundred and Sixth is a Preface to the Books of Kings, where he sets down the number of thē Canonical Books of the old Testament, according to the Jewish Catalogue.

The hundred and Seventh is a Preface to the Chronicles directed to Chromatius.

The hundred and Eighth is another Preface to the Chronicles.

The hundred and Ninth is a Preface to Ezra and Nehemiah.

The hundred and Tenth is the Preface to Tobit.

The hundred and Eleventh to Judith.

The hundred and Twelth to Esther.

The hundred and Thirteenth to Job.

The hundred and Fourteenth is another Preface to Job.

The hundred and Fifteenth is a Preface to the Books of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Can∣ticles.

The hundred and Sixteenth is a particular Letter concerning his Translation of Ecclesiastes.

The hundred and Seventeenth to Isaiah.

The hundred and Eighteenth to Jeremiah.

The hundred and Ninteenth to Ezekiel.

The hundred and Twentieth to Daniel.

The hundred and Twenty first to the Twelve Minor Prophets.

The hundred and Twenty second to Joel.

The hundred and Twenty third is a Preface directed by S. Jerom to Damasus upon the new Translation of the four Evangelists.

The hundred and Twenty-fourth is a Letter from Damasus to S. Jerom, wherein he asketh him five Questions about the Holy Scripture. The First, what is the meaning of those Words. Genesis Chap. 4. Whosoever Slays Cain, Vengeance shall be taken on him seven-fold. The second, if all that God did was very good, as it is said in Genesis wherefore is mention made of Clean and unclean Creatures? The third why God said to Abraham, that the Children of Israel should go out of Egypt in the fourth Generation; and yet it is said in Exodus that it was the fifth Generation which came out of Egypt. The fourth why Abraham received Circumcision as a Seal of Faith. And the fifth why Isaac Blessed that Son whom he designed not to Bless.

S. Jerom makes no answer to Damasus about the second and fourth Question, because they were handled at Large by Tertullian, Novatian, Origen and Didymus: But he explaineth the rest. He saith to the first concerning those Words of Genesis, Whosoever slays Cain Vengeance shall be taken on him Sevenfold; That they signifie, that whosoever killeth Cain, shall undergo the seven sorts of Revenge, or Punishment wherewith he was threatned. He resolves the Third, by observing that we are not to Read in Exodus, that the Children of Israel went out of Egypt at the Fifth Generation, as it is in the Translation of the Seventy, but that they went out Armed, as it is in Aquila's Translation: Lastly he answereth the fifth, saying that Isaac did that good thing for the Family, in Blessing Jacob by a particular Effect of God's Providence without know∣ing it: He cites afterwards a Passage out of Hyppolitus, which gives an Allegorical Sense to that Action, affirming that Esau was a Type of the People of the Jews, and Jacob that of the Church. He approves this Exposition, and so he easily answers Damasus his Question.

In the hundred and Twenty fifth Letter to Evagrius, he examineth who Melchisedeck was: He rejects that Man's Opinion, who held that Melchisedeck was the Holy Spirit. As also Origen's and Didymus's who said that Melchisedeck was an Angel. He produces the Opinions of Hyppo∣litus, S. Irenaeus, Eusebius, and Eustathius, who believed him to have been a Canaanite, King of a City called Salem, and a Priest of the Lord: He likewise takes Notice of the Jewish Opinion that it was Sem Noah's Son, and he seems not to disapprove it. He observes that the City of Salem, was not Jerusalem as Josephus and most of the ancients believed, but another City near Scythopolis, called, as he says, Salem even in his time.

The following Letter to Fabiola, is a moral Explication of the Forty Encampings of the Israelites, from their going out of Egypt to the Land of Promise. He looks upon that Journey

as a Representation of the way to Heaven, and to every decamping he applies a moral Instru∣ction. The like Reflections are made in the Hundred and twenty eighth Letter upon the Habits, and Sacerdotal Ornaments of the Priests under the old Law.

He shews in the Hundred and twenty ninth, that what is said of the promised Land, is to be understood spiritually of eternal Glory, and as he makes use particularly of the Epistle to the He∣brews to prove his Assertion, so he affirms, that tho' the Greek Churches will not own it no more than the Revelations of S. John, yet the Latins receive both, because they are quoted by the An∣cients.

In the Hundred and thirtieth to Marcella, he tells her what the Ephod and Teraphim were.

The Hundred and thirty first Letter to Rufinus, contains an Allegorical Exposition of the Hi∣story of the two Women that were judged by Solomon, who were, as he pretends a Figure of the Church and of the Synagogue.

In the Hundred and thirty second, he answers an Historical difficulty about the years of Solomon and Ahaz. It is said of Solomon that he began to Reign at twelve years, that he Reigned fourty years, and that his Son Roboam Succeeded him being fourty one years old. It seems by that, that Solomon had a Son at eleven years: The same is said of King Ahaz. He is said to have begun his Reign at twenty years of Age, that he Reigned sixteen years, and that his Son Hezekiah Succeeded him at the Age of twenty five, which also intimates that Ahaz had him at Eleven years of Age. This seems Extraordinary and Incredible. S. Jerom answers that it might possibly be, but that the difficulty might be Salved thus, that the Reigns both of Solomon and of Ahaz, may have had a double beginning: When they began to Reign with their Fathers, and when they began to Reign by themselves. This being supposed, the answer is at Hand, when it is said that Solomon began to Reign at twelve, and Ahaz at twenty years of Age, is to be understood of the beginning of their Reign with their Fathers, whereas when it is said in another Place, that they died after having Reigned, one fourty, and the other sixteen years, that is to be understood of the Time when they began to Reign alone. Whence it follows that they might then be of Age to have Children. He confesses at the Latter end of this Letter that there are several Chronological difficulties in the History of the old Testament: Especially about the years of the Kings of Israel and of Juda, but he would have no Man trouble himself much to Explain them.

The Hundred and thirty third Letter to Marcella is a Critick upon the Commentary upon the Canticles, that was made by Rheticius Bishop of Autun. He observes several Faults in that Au∣thor, which were mentioned in the second Volume of this Bibliotheca.

The Hundred and thirty fourth to Sophronius containeth Notes upon the Psalms. He saith that some divide them into Five Books, but that he Comprehended all in one Volume, following therein the Authority of the Jews and the Apostles. He affirms that they are written by those whose Names are found at the beginning of every Psalm. He speaks afterwards of his Latin Translation of the Psalms, and of Sophronius's design to Translate it into Greek.

The Hundred and thirty fifth Letter to Sunia and Fretella, is a Critick upon those passages of the Psalms where the Greek of the Septuagint, and the Latin Version differ. S. Jerom layeth this down for a Rule, That when there is a Difference betwixt the Latin Copies of the New Testament, they ought to go to the Original: So likewise when there is any Difference between the Greek and the Latin of the Old Testament, to find out the Truth, the Hebrew Text ought to be consulted. By this Rule he explains all those passages of the Psalms where the Greek of the Seventy, and the Version then in use did not agree.

In the Hundred and thirty sixth to Marcella, he expounds the ten several Names given to God in the Hebrew Tongue.

In the Hundred and thirty seventh to the same, he gives the Signification of the Terms Halleluja, Amen, Maranatha. Halleluja, according to him, signifies praise the Lord. Amen is a Word which signifies that Credit is given to a thing, desiring that it may be so; and which may be rendred, So be it. Maranatha is a Syriack Word, which S. Jerom translateth, Our Lord comes.

In the Hundred and thirty eighth Epistle to the same, he shows the Meaning of the Hebrew Selah, which the Greeks translate Diapsalma, a Word very frequent in the Psalms. He saith that some have said that the Diapsalma was an Alteration of the Verse; and others, that it signified a Pause; others, a Change of the Tune: He is not of their mind, but saith with Aquila, that Selah sig∣nifies always.

The Hundred and thirty ninth, to Cyprian, is an Exposition of the Eighty ninth Psalm ac∣cording to the Hebrew Text.

The Hundred and thirtieth, to Principia, is an Exposition of the Forty fourth Psalm.

The Hundred and forty first containeth certain Remarks to understand the Hundred and twenty sixth Psalm.

The Hundred and forty second, and Hundred forty third, to Damasus, clears the History of Uz∣ziah, speaks of the Seraphim, the Holy, holy, holy, and the rest of Isaiah's Vision described in the sixth Chapter of his Prophecy.

The Hundred and forty fifth Letter to Pope Damasus, explains the meaning of the Word Hosanna, rejecting S. Hilary's Opinion, who thought that it signified The Redemption of David's House; as also that it signified Glory: To expound it he appeals to the Hebrew Text, and pretends, that Hosanna, whereof they have made Hosanna, signifies Save us Lord.

The Hundred and forty sixth to the same, is an allegorical Exposition of the Parable of the prodigal Son, whom he supposes to be a Figure of the Gentiles converted to the Faith.

In the Hundred and forty seventh to Amandus, he gives a literal Explication of three passages of the New Testament, of these Words of Jesus Christ, Matth. ch. 6. Take no thought for the morrow; sufficient unto the Day is the evil thereof. Of those of S. Paul, 1 Cor. 2. He that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body: and of that other of S. Paul, 1 Cor. 15. where he saith, that all things are subject to the Son of God, and that he is subject to him who hath put all things under him. At the latter end he moves the Question, whether a Woman having left her Husband because he was an Adulterer, or given to unnatural Lusts, may be married to ano∣ther; and if, having done it, she might be admitted to the Communion? He answers, That she cannot marry without sinning, and ought not to be admitted to the Communion but after Penance, and having renounced the second Husband.

In the Hundred and forty eighth, he resolves five Questions, which Marcella put to him upon several passages of the New Testament. The first is, How S. Paul could say, that eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither have entred into the heart of Man the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. Since he says in another place, that God hath revealed them by his Spirit. S. Jerom answereth that in the former place S. Paul speaks of the things which the Eyes and Ears of Flesh may apprehend, and what may be comprehended by humane Understanding without Revelation. The second Question was about the Exposition which S. Jerom had given of the Parable of the Goats and of the Sheep, which are at the right, and at the left Hand of God; whereby he understood the Jews and the Gentiles, and not good and evil Men. Here S. Jerom referrs to what he had said in his Books to Jovinian. The third Question was concerning those of whom the Apostle saith, that they shall be carried alive into the Air at the Day of Judgment to meet Jesus Christ. S. Jerom sticks not to say, that this is to be understood literally, and that such as shall be found alive then shall not die, but their Bodies shall become incorruptible and immortal. The fourth is about those Words of Jesus Christ to Mary Magdalen, Touch me not. This is the Sence of them according to S. Jerom, You deserve not to fall down at my Feet and worship me, seeing you doubted of my Resurrection. It is more natural to expound them after this other manner, Do not make haste to embrace and to hold me, I am not yet ascended into Hea∣ven, I will abide for some time upon Earth, and you may do it at leisure. The last Question is to know whether Christ being upon Earth after his Resurrection, was likewise in Heaven at the same time? S. Jerom answereth, that it is unquestionable that the Word of God was every where; but he does not answer the Question proposed precisely, which was not concerning the Di∣vinity, but the Humanity of Jesus Christ.

In the Hundred and forty ninth Letter he proposeth to himself one of the chiefest and most con∣siderable Difficulties of the New Testament; namely what is the Sin against the Holy Ghost, and in what Sence it is unpardonable. But he doth not go to the bottom of the Question, shewing only by the bye, against Novatian, that it is not the Sin of Idolatry.

The Hundred and fiftieth to Hebidia, and the Hundred and fifty first, to Algasia, contain So∣lutions of three and twenty Difficulties about particular Passages of the New Testament, which these Ladies had put to S. Jerom. They are very curious Questions, and S. Jerom's Answers are very just and learned.

To these Works we ought to join the Treatises which are at the latter end of the eighth Volume, which likewise are Critical Letters. Namely,

The Book of the Names of the Cities and Countries mentioned in the Bible, translated out of Eusebius.

An Exposition of the Hebrew proper Names in the Old and New Testament.

The Hundred and fifty first Epistle is an Explication of the Hebrew Alphabet, written whilst he was at Rome.

A Collection of Traditions, or rather Jewish Expositions upon Genesis; a most curious and useful Work for the right Understanding of the Text of the Scripture; where he takes Notice of all the Differences betwixt the Hebrew Text and the Translation of the Septuagint.

The Hundred and fifty second Letter, to Minerius and Alexander, upon these Words of S. Paul, 1 Cor. 15. We shall not all die, but we all shall be changed: wherein he gives a particular Account of the different Expositions of this Place by the ancient Commentators. He quoteth Theodorus of Perinthus, Diodorus of Tarsus, Apollinaris, Acacius of Caesarea, and Origen. This Letter is of the year 406.

In the same place is the Hundred and fifty third Letter to Paulinus, written about the same time; he answereth two Questions put to him. The first, how one could reconcile to Free-Will, what is said in Genesis, that God hardned Pharaoh's heart; and what S. Paul saith, That it is nei∣ther of the Will, nor of the Endeavours of Men, but of God who maketh Man to act. The second why S. Paul calleth the Children that are born of baptized Parents, holy, since they cannot be saved, but by receiving and preserving the Grace of Baptism. For the former, S. Jerom referreth him to what Origen saith upon that Subject in the Book of Principles newly translated by S. Jerom. And to the second, he answereth, with Tertullian, that the Children of Christians are called holy, be∣cause they are as it were Candidates for the Faith, and have not been defiled with Idolatry; adding, that the Scripture gives the Name of holy to things that are pure; and that in this Sence the Vessels of the Temple are said to be holy.

Lastly, There▪ is in the same place the Hundred fifty fourth Letter to Desiderius and Serenilla, whom he invites to come to Bethlehem. It is written after the Treatise of Famous men, about the Year 400.

We are to reckon likewise amongst S. Jerom's critical Works upon the Bible, the Corrections and Translations which he made of the Books of the Scripture. At first he corrected the Greek Text of the Seventy, and reformed the common Edition, by Origen's Hexapla. He made a new Translation o 1.99 of them, wherein he mark'd by two Hooks, those passages of the Septuagint that were not in the Hebrew Text, and added the Version of what was in the Hebrew Text, which was not in the Translation of the LXX, noting those Additions with a Star, so that in this Tran∣slation one might see at once, both what was added, and what was wanting in the Version of the LXX. This Translation of S. Jerom's of the Books of the Prophets, is joyned to his Commen∣taries.

This was the first Labour of S. Jerom upon the Bible, which he undertook when he was but young in his first Retirement.

Afterwards having attained to a more perfect knowledge of the Hebrew Tongue, he conceived that it would prove a considerable Service to the Church, if he set forth an entire Translation of his own from the Hebrew Text. Wherefore he fell upon that Work, and published a new La∣tin Version of all the Books, which the Jews own to be Canonical p 1.100 and of the Books of Judith and Tobit, setting before the beginning of each Book the Prefaces already mentioned.

This new Translation of S. Jerom was but ill received in the Church at first. Men were very much pre-possessed in favour of the Septuagint, and S. Jerom's enterprize was looked upon as a rash and dangerous Innovation: S. Augustin himself disliked it, and sent him word, as we have seen, that he would have done better if he had been contented with the Translation of the Septua∣gint, and not have gone about a new one, which would certainly cause some Scandal and trou∣ble in the Church. Rufinus and others of S. Jerom's Enemies, went yet further, and accused him of perverting the Scripture, and despising the Authority of the Apostles, by rejecting the LXX's Translation which they had made use of, to introduce a new one, borrowed, in some sort from the Jews. All these reproaches did not hinder S. Jerom from publishing his new Translation. He shews the injustice of his Accu••ers in most of his Prefaces. Sometimes he complains of the ingra∣titude of Persons in his Age, who instead of acknowledging the good Services he had done to the Church, reckoned it as a Crime in him: Sometimes he declares, That he did not undertake that new Translation to condemn the Septuagint which he commends, and approves, and which he corrected and translated in his Youth, and that his design barely was, to do an useful Work. Some∣times he saith, That he was obliged to make a new Translation, because the Septuagint had been corrupted. But for the most part he affirms openly, That the main reason which put him upon making a new Translation, was, the want of Exactness in that of the Seventy, and the small Conformity which it had with the Hebrew Text; which, he believes ought to be de∣pended upon, as the true Original. And for this reason, almost as often as he speaks of it, he gives it the Name of the Hebrew truth. He alledgeth also political Reasons for his undertaking. The Jews accused us in their Disputes with us, that we did not faithfully quote the Holy Scri∣pture, they continually urged that the Hebrew Text was not conformable to what was cited to them out of the Translation of the LXX. The Christians who were ignorant of the Hebrew, and besides had no Translation from the Hebrew, were extremely perplexed, and were forced, ei∣ther to remain Speechless, or to have recourse to the Rabbins. He sheweth how necessary it was, that a Christian learned in the Hebrew Tongue, should make a Translation conformable to the Hebrew Text. S. Jerom had another Argument to recommend his Translation to the Latins, and that was point of Honour.

The Greeks, says he, boast that the Latins have the Holy Scripture only thro' their Channel; it is good to beat down their Pride, and to let them know, that the Latins have no need of them, but could go to the Fountain-head themselves. Interest and Conveniency, were Considerations, that S. Jerom also made use of to bring his Translation into credit. There were a great many diffe∣rent Greek Translations; and several Editions of the Seventy quite different one from the other; It was impossible to compare them together without great pains, and much labour, and to have them without a great deal of Money. And after all, that Variety brought in great Confu∣sion, and rendred the Scripture almost unintelligible, to those that did not understand the He∣brew Text. How necessary then was it to deliver the World out of that perplexity, by setting forth a Translation conformable to the Original, which should make all the rest almost useless.

How good soever these Reasons were in themselves, yet they were not strong enough to make S. Jerom's Translation welcome to the Latins at first; they kept for the most part to the ancient vulgar Version, being unwilling that any thing should be altered it: But by little and little S. Je∣rom's got some credit; tho' the ancient vulgar was still in use; so that in S. Gregory's time both these Translations were followed, and this Father observes, that himself used sometimes one, and sometimes the other. Since that time S. Jerom's Translation got the upper hand, and was received and read publickly in the Churches of the West, excepting the Translation of the Psalms, and some Mixtures of the ancient vulgar Translation q 1.101, some passages whereof have been preserved in the vulgar Latin.

As for the New Testament, S. Jerom did not undertake to make a new Translation, but con∣tented himself with comparing the old one with the Greek, and to correct the principal passages where it disagreed with the Text, as he said himself in the Preface of the Gospels to Damasus, in a Letter to S. Augustin, and in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers. This work was much bet∣ter received than the new Version of the Old Testament from the Hebrew, and hardly any Body was offended at it, because the Greek Tongue being easily understood, it was not difficult to dis∣cover the Alterations that might be made in the Greek Text, which could not be done in the He∣brew which was understood by the Jews only.

S. Jerom's Commentaries upon the Scripture, have great Relation to his other Studies, and those Writings that we have hitherto spoken of. First of all he sets down the ancient vulgar Translation, and with it joyns commonly his New Translation: Secondly, He enquires after the Sence of the He∣brew Text exactly, and compares it with the several Greek Versions. He cites the other places of Scripture which have any Relation to that which he expoundeth. In making these Observations, he clears the literal Sence of the Scripture, and discovers the Prophecies, by shewing their Accom∣plishment. And in the last place, he adds mystical Explications, and short Allegories, which most commonly are only Etymologies, and Turns of Wit about words. He confesseth, that very often, he barely translated some passages of Origen's Commentaries, and other Greek Authors without naming them: Wherefore he pretends, that the Errors and Contradictions in his Com∣mentaries are not to be imputed to him; because he only related the Opinions of others without approving them: that if he condemned them not, yet he did not intend to defend them, but would spare the others Reputation: And lastly, That this Moderation should give his Enemies no occasion to Calumniate as they did, and to accuse him of upholding such Errors, that he was so far from, and which he refuted in other places.

These Remarks may give a General Idea of S. Jerom's Commentaries upon the Bible, especially upon the Books of the Prophets, wherein he followeth this method now described exactly, and insists particularly upon the Exposition of the Historical Sence of the Prophecies. He divided his Commentaries into several Books, and intermix'd here and there some Prefaces, in which he ex∣plains in general, the subject of his Commentaries, and then answers the Calumnies that were raised against him.

The Fourth Volume contains his Commentaries upon the Four great Prophets, namely eigh∣teen Books of Commentaries upon Isaiah, Six upon Jeremiah, Fourteen upon Ezekiel, and one upon Daniel.

The Fifth Volume contains the Commentaries upon Ecclesiastes and the Twelve minor Pro∣phets.

In the Sixth Volume are S. Jerom's Commentaries upon the Books of the New Testament, after these there is a Preface to Damasus upon the Four Evangelists, a Canon, or a Table of the Harmony of the Four Evangelists: Four Books of Commentaries or Notes upon S. Matthew's Gospel; wherein he explains very clearly the Letter of the Gospel, only adding now and then some moral Reflections, but he doth not inlarge upon Allegories. He observeth very near the same method in his Commentaries upon S. Paul's Epistles to the Galatians, Ephesians, Titus and Philemon, which are in the same Volum, with the Translation of Didymus's Book of the Holy Ghost.

These Commentaries were not written by S. Jerom in the same order as they are set down in this Edition. Those upon the New Testament were composed first, not long after he was returned from his Journey to Rome towards the Year 388. About the same time he writ his Commenta∣ries upon Ecclesiastes, and undertook afterwards those upon the minor. Prophets, beginning at Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai. These Works were completed before the Year 392. The Commentaries upon the others held him till towards the Year 400. Afterwards he wrote upon Daniel, and having done that, he undertook the Commentary upon Isaiah, which was ended in 409; in 410. he composed that upon Ezekiel. The last of all are the Commentary upon Jeremiah, as it is observed in the Preface. If we add to these Works already men∣tioned, the Translation of Origen's two Homilies upon the Canticles, that are in the Eighth Volume, of the Nine Homelies upon Isaiah, of Fourteen upon Ezekiel, and of Fourteen upon Jeremiah, which are among Origen's Works, and the Version of Eusebius's Chronicon, we have all the Genuine Works of S. Jerom, the rest being spurious as we shall shew afterwards.

As for the Chronicon it should not be looked upon as a mere Translation of Eusebius, S. Je∣rom having added many things to it, as he says in his Preface, where he observes that what is there from Ninus and Abraham to the taking of Troy, is a faithful Translation of the Greek: that from the taking of Troy, to the 20th. Year of Constantine, he had added and altered many things, which he had collected out of Suetonius and other Latin Authors; and last of all, That he continued Eu∣sebius his Chronicon from the 20th. Year of Constantine, to the Sixth Consulship of Valens, and the Second of Valentinian, that is to the Year 378. of the vulgar Aera.

We have lost a Commentary of S. Jerom upon the Tenth Psalm, and the Six following, di∣vided into seven parts, which he mentions in his Catalogue. Notes upon all the Psalms, which he speaks of in the first Apology against Rufinus; and a Treatise upon the Book of Job, which he mentions in the Commentary upon the Fifth Chapter of Amos. S. Augustin in his Treatise of He∣resies to Quodvultdeus, saith, That he had heard that S. Jerom had composed a Treatise upon the same Subject, but that he could not find it. The same Saint speaks in the Two hundred and sixtieth Epistle to Oceanus, of a Treatise of S. Jerom's which Orosius had brought to Ocea∣nus, wherein he treated of the Resurrection. Cassiodorus names some other Works of this Father, as a Letter to Antius, where he saith, That he has explained great Difficulties: An Ex∣position upon Salomon's Judgment: Notes upon all the Prophets; and a Commentary upon the Reveldtions. Trithemius mentions a moral Commentary upon the Four Gospels, and another up∣on the Canonical Epistles; but these Treatises are not extant: neither is it very certain, that they were S. Jerom's.

I have omitted some Books that are in this Volume now mentioned, because they are not S. Jerom's, tho' they bear his Name; Here is the Catalogue of them, and a Critick upon them.

The Questions upon the book of Chronicles, and the Books of Kings, which are re∣jected by most of the Criticks, as being not S. Jerom's. First, Because when S. Jerom makes a Catalogue of his Works, he speaks only of his Questions upon Genesis, but says no∣thing of his having written the like work upon the Chronicles, or the Kings. 2. Because the sub∣ject and the stile of these latter Questions seems different from that of the former. In his Que∣stions upon Genesis, S. Jerom sets down often the Hebrew words of the Text, and the Greek terms of the Translations, of which he examines the differences: but in these there is nothing like it. In the Questions upon Genesis, he seriously searcheth into the Sence of the Scripture, and makes solid and useful Reflections: These on the contrary are full of useless, trifling, and fabulous Remarks. Wherefore Lyranus thinks they are unworthy of S. Jerom; and ascribes them to some new∣ly converted Jew: For my part I would not affirm so positively, that they are not S. Jerom's. They were composed by a Man that understood Hebrew, who kept to the Letter of the Holy Scripture, who was acquainted with Jewish Traditions: all which Characters belong to S. Jerom: the stile of those Books is very like his, and no Man ought to wonder that in a Treatise of this Nature he hath followed some of the Jewish Fancies.

This will not hold of the small Treatise which contains the Explication of the Countries, and Towns spoken of in the Acts: it being evidently written by some other Author besides S. Je∣rom, since he quotes this Fathers Treatise when speaking of Smyrna. It is among Bede's Works, who probably may be the Author of it.

The Commentary upon the Lamentations of Jeremiah is a Collection by Rabanus of the thoughts of several Fathers, and particularly of S. Gregory. It is among that Author's Works, and it is cited under his Name, by Bonaventure, in his Commentary upon the Lamentations.

The Commentary or Book of Annotations upon S. Mark's Gospel, is altogether unworthy of S. Jerom, both for the stile and for the matter. The Author knew neither Greek nor Hebrew, nor spake very good Latin. He is guilty of ridiculous Errors, as when he saith, That Pascha sig∣nifies Passage in Latin, and that Phase signifies the offering of a Victim, and when he Remarks that Nardus Pistica, is as much as to say Mystical. He confounds Mary Magdalen, with Mary of Be∣thany; an Opinion refuted by S. Jerom in his Commentary upon the Twenty sixth Chapter of S. Matthew. Speaking of the Cross, he repeateth several Verses out of Sedulius, who writ long after S. Jerom.

The Commentaries upon the Psalms have not fewer Marks of their being Supposititious, for 1. The Author of them had no knowledge of the Hebrew and Greek Tongues. 2. His Method

in Expounding the Scripture is quite different from S. Jerom's, for whereas S. Jerom keepeth to the Historical and Literal Sence, he uses only Moral and Mystical Expositions. 3. His Remarks are contrary to S. Jerom's; as when he Expoundeth the Hundred and fourth Psalm, he saith that Cynomia is a Dog-fly. But S. Jerom rejects that Notion, at the latter end of his Letter to Sunia and Fretella. Upon the Eighty sixth Psalm, he observes that according to the Hebrew, it must be Nunquid Sion, dicet Homo? S. Jerom renders it, Ad Sion, dicet Homo. He denies that the Eighty ninth Psalm is written by Moses, tho' S. Jerom ascribes it to him, in his Commentary upon the thirteenth Psalm. He saith that a Passage of Scripture cited by S. Paul in the third Ch. of the Epistle to the Romans, is taken out of Deuteronomy, and S. Jerom shews that it is out of Isaiah. 4. This Authour's Stile is far from the Elegancy of S. Jerom's, nay it is very sull of Faults, Repetitions, and Solecisms. 5. This Authour's Commentary is made up of common Places, and moral Exhortations. 6. He quoteth S. Eucherius upon the Sixteenth Psalm. 7. It is ma∣nifest that these Commentaries are not Notes explaining the Letter of the Scripture; but In∣structions, and Conferences (as appears by the Expositions of the Eighty ninth, Hundred and eleventh, and Hundred and fifteenth Psalms) whose Conclusions are in the form, of an Homily; and by several Expressions, discovering that the Author spake to others. And this has made it be believ'd, that they are the Discourses of some Monk, who expounded the Psalms to his Brethren, by collecting the Expositions of some Commentators. Wherefore it is no wonder to find in the Commentary upon the Ninety third Psalm a passage which S. Augustin citeth in his E∣pistle to Fortunatianus, under S. Jerom's Name, and in the Commentary upon the Fiftieth Psalm, another passage quoted under S. Jerom's Name by S. Gregory, in his Exposition of the Fourth pen∣tential Psalm.

The Commentary upon Job, having been made, as appears by the Conclusion, at the request of Victorius an English Bishop, who lived in Bede's time, cannot be S. Jerom's, but very likely Bede's himself. Some attribute it to Philip a Priest and Monk, S. Jerom's Disciple, to whom Gen∣nadius ascribes Commentaries upon Job. But this Commentary of Philip's is that which is attribu∣ted to Bede, and this is rather Bede's, being very like the Commentary upon the Proverbs of Solo∣mon, which is undoubtedly his, as Trithemius assures us: These Commentaries do very much differ from S. Jerom's, both as to the Stile, and the Matter: The Author citeth the Scripture according to our Vulgar Translation; he quotes S. Augustin, S. Gregory, and S. Jerom. In the Commentary upon the Twenty fifth Chapter of Job, there is a passage cited by Faustus Rhedonensis under S. Je∣rom's Name: It is likely that the Author of that Work had taken it out of this Father.

The Commentaries, or Notes upon all S. Paul's Epistles are not S. Jerom's, but a Pelagian Au∣thor's, who openly teacheth his Errors in several places, and particularly upon the Seventh Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans. It is certain, that Pelagius made a Commentary upon S. Paul's Epistles, which S. Augustin quoteth in several places of the Third Book of Merits, and Re∣mission of sins. This same Commentary of Pelagius is likewise cited by Marius Mercator, and there are most of the passages quoted by both these Authors. Yet two or three are not there; which might give occasion of doubting, whether it were perfectly the same, if Cassiodorus had not informed, us that he struck some places out of it.

The Epistle to Demetrias the Virgin which is the first Book of S. Jerom's Ninth Volume, be∣longs likewise to Pelagius, as S. Augustin assures us, in his Book of the Grace of Jesus Christ, where he refuteth the Errors therein contained.

The Second Epistle of the same Volume is a Letter of S. Augustin's to Juliana, Demetrias's Mo∣ther, against the foregoing Letter.

The Third directed to Gerontius's Daughters, is of the same stile with the First; and the Au∣thor seems to be of the same Opinions. He commendeth S. Paulinus as his Contemporary and his Friend.

The Eighth Letter of the knowledge of God's Law, seems to belong to the same Author, and perhaps Pelagius, who was S. Paulinus's Friend, and had written a Letter to him.

The Fourth Letter to Marcella, the Fifth to a Banished Virgin, the Ninth of the Three Ver∣tues, the Twelfth of the Honour due to Parents are written in the same stile. Marianus thinks that the former belong to S. Paulinus. The Sixth, and Seventh are of the same Author: In this last there is some Discourse of the Worship of Relicks, and of discovering the Bodies of S. Gerva∣sius, and S. Protasius by S. Ambrose. Some ascribe both these Letters to Maximus Taurinensis.

The Tenth Letter of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, is written by some Latin Author who lived when the East was infected with the Errors of the Eutychians; as he observeth himself▪ long after the Death of S. Jerom, and Sophronius, to whom some have attributed this Letter. He that writ it set it out under S. Jerom's Name, that what he saith of the Blessed Virgin Mary, might be more valued. And the better to colour his Cheat, he pretends to direct it to Paula and Eustochium. Altho' he enlargeth much upon the Commendations and Prerogatives of the Virgin Mary, yet he saith that it was not certain, whether she was risen again, and her Body carried up into Heaven. This Treatise tho' supposititious, was inserted into the Offices of the Church by Paulus Diaconus, and Alcuinus, in Charlemaign's time: And since it hath made up part of the Lessons for the Feast of the Assumption, in the old Breviaries of France and Ita••y.

The Eleventh is likewise upon the same Subject, and perhaps written by the same Author.

The Book of the Seven Ecclesiastical Orders, falsly supposed to be directed to Rusticus Bishop

of Narbon, who lived at the same time with S. Leo, belongs to a Modern Author in comparison of S. Jerom, who lived after Isidore of Seville, from whom he hath taken many things. Yet he is older than Micrologus, or than Bishop Hincmar, who quote this Work under S. Jerom's N••me; which shows that this Author wrote about the seventh Century.

The fourteenth Letter is a Commendation of Virginity; where he describes the Danger of Losing it, and the Enormity of the Crime committed by a Virgin consecrated to God, when she viola∣teth her Vows. This likewise is a Work of an Author younger than S. Jerom, as well as the thirteenth Letter, where some Expressions which the Scripture makes use of after a Manner suitable to the Weakness of our Understanding, are explained. An ordinary Skill may discover that none of these pieces are S. Jerom's.

The Creed attributed to Damasus, which is the fifteenth piece of this Volume, is a Confession of Faith copied out, partly from that in S. Gregory Nazianzen, and in Vigilius Tapsensis, which we attributed to Gregory of Boetica: but this was brought to the Form it now has, long after Damasus; for there is the Article that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and the Son. which was not in all the ancient Creeds.

The Explication of the Creed dedicated to Damasus, immediately after this Confession of Faith now spoken of, is that Confession of Faith which Pelagius sent to Pope Innocent, that is condem∣ned by S. Augustin in his Book of the Grace of Jesus Christ, where he produces some Extracts out of it, which are word for word in this.

The eighteenth Tract is a third Confession of Faith, supposed to be directed to S. Cyril, and com∣posed by some Modern Author, as appears by his Method of Expounding the Mysteries.

The following Treatise upon the Creed goes under Rufinus's Name, who without dispute is the true Author of it.

The Treatise to Praesidius is a Declamation composed by some mean Imitator of S. Jerom, who affects to speak of the Deaths of Valentinian and Gratian, as happening in his time, for I cannot believe that the trifles and impertinences that occurr in that Work are S. Jerom's: they are far more worthy of an Impostor.

The Treatise of the Circumcision to Therasia, is a more genuine and an Ancienter Monument.

The Twenty first Epistle is a Letter of S. Augustin to Januarius, which was formerly the One hundred and nineteenth, and now the Fifty fifth among this Father's Epistles.

The Authour of the two following Treatises is not known, which are, the one a Declamation against a Virgin called Susanna, that was fallen into sin; and the other a reproof to Evagrius, for refusing to comfort a Churchman that had sinned.

The Twenty fourth Letter is written by Paulinus.

The other Pieces in the first part of this Volume are mean, and flat Sermons upon divers Sub∣jects.

The Thirty sixth concerning the Observation of the Eves of Holidays is ascribed in the Third Volume of F. Dachery's Spicilegium, to Nicetius Bishop of Triers, who lived about the year 535: there may be possibly several other Sermons of the same Author.

The Fortieth and last, is a Letter upon the Parable of the Prodigal Son, which belongs to some Pelagian Author, and perhaps to Pelagius himself.

The Second part of this Volume containeth certain Discourses very like S. Jerom's, though they bear the Names of their Authors. These are, a Letter of S. Paulinus to Sebastian the Hermit, the Translation of Pamphilus his Apology for Origen, a Treatise of Rufinus concerning the falsification of Origen's Books, the Translation of Origen's Principles by Rufinus, with his Prologue, Rufinus his Apology to Pope Anastasius, this Pope's Letter to John of Jerusalem: Both the Books of Rufinus against S. Jerom. Three Letters of S. Augustin to S. Jerom, which formerly were the Twenty eighth, Twenty ninth, and One hundred fifty seventh, amongst S. Augustin's, and now the One hundred sixty sixth, One hundred sixty seventh, and One hundred ninetieth, and the Homily of the Pastors which is in the Ninth Volume of the same Author. The Epistle attributed to Valerius addressed to Rufinus, which comes after these Treatises of S. Augustin, is the Work of some Impostor.

Gennadius his Book of Famous Men, is a continuation of S. Jerom's: but the Catalogue of some Ecclesiastical Authors, which is found also in this Volume, is a sad piece, and so are two Letters going before it, and two others immediately following, falsely ascribed to S. Jerom and to Damasus.

The Rule for Monks is a Collection of Sentences and Precepts taken out of S. Jerom, compo∣sed by Lupus General of the Monks that stiled themselves of the Order of Hermits of S. Jerom, and approved by Pope Martin V.

The Dialogue, of the Origination of the Soul, betwixt S. Augustin and S. Jerom, is the Fiction of some ignorant Person, who drew out of both these Fathers Works some Passages of his Dialogue.

It is not easy to guess who was the Author of the small Treatise of the Body and Bloud of Jesus Christ; but it is easy to guess, that he that composed it was well vers'd in the Doctrine of the Fathers: The same may be said of the Author that wrote the Homily upon the Parable of the importunate Neighbour who asked a Loaf o•• his Friend. Luk. chap. 11.

The third part of this Volume contains such ••reatises as Marianus judged unworthy to be ranked among Pieces of any Value. He might have joined to them those which he set down in the first and second Rank, whereof some are even more contemptible than those in the third.

He begins with three Epistles which some Impostor composed under S. Jerom's Name. But the Imposture is discovered by the Meanness of the Expressions, and the little Exactness in the Thoughts, which discover the Cheat. The first is a comforting Letter to Tyrasius upon the Death of his Daughter. The second an Exhortation to Oceanus, how Injuries are to be en∣dured. The third to the same, concerning the Lives of Clergy-men. It is a strange thing that Baronius durst affirm this to be really S. Jerom's, it being manifest that the Stile is very different from S. Jerom's; besides that he speaketh of S. Martin, whom he calleth Blessed, and of his Life composed by Sulpitius Severus. We have already given our Judgment of the Catalogue of Ec∣clesiastical Authors that is inserted here, and of the precedent and following Letters.

The Rule for Nuns is written by some simple and unlearned Monk.

The Letter of Chromatius and Heliodorus to S. Jerom, and the Answer under this Father's Name, upon the Virgin Mary's Life, are fabulous Fictions wholly unworthy of Credit.

Lastly, S. Jerom's Life, supposed to have been written by his Disciple Eusebius, S. Augustin's Letter to S. Cyril in S. Jerom's Commendation, and S. Cyril's to S. Augustin about his Miracles, are rejected by every body, as miserable Pieces, full of Fables, Falsities and Ignorance. Can there be a grosser one than what the Pseudo-Cyril saith, That S. Jerom's Miracles convinced Sil∣vanus the Heretick, who taught, That there were two Wills in Christ? as if either S. Cyril or S. Je∣rom had lived in the Time of the Monothelites, or had approved of those Hereticks Do∣ctrines.

S. Jerom, doubtless, was the Learnedest of all the Fathers; he understood Languages very well, and was well skilled in Humanity and Philological Learning. He was well vers'd in Ecclesiasti∣cal and Prophane History, and very skilful in Philosophy. Poets, Historians, Orators, and the Greek and Latin Philosophers were equally familiar to him; he throughly understood them, and filled his Writings with their finest Strokes. His Way of Writing is clear and lively. He affects not that lofty Eloquence of the Barr, which is supported by high Terms and a hand∣som Turn of a Period; but he excelleth in that other kind of Eloquence that is necessary for those that commit their Thoughts to Writing, which consists in the Nobleness of Expressions and Thoughts. His Discourse is enlivened by a wonderful Variety of lively and surprizing Turns, and adorned with an infinite number of different Colours, sometimes he brings in Flowers of Rhetorick; sometimes he dexterously employs Logical Subtilties. He often makes apt Allu∣sions by the finest passages of the Poets, and constantly calleth to his Assistance the Thoughts and Maxims of the Philosophers. In a word, he collects the finest things in all Arts and Sciences, and adapts them so exactly to his Discourse, that they seem to be there in their natural Place. So that his Style may be compared to those in-laid Works, where the Pieces are so artificially pieced together that they seem to have been made one for the other. Yet it must be confessed that he affecteth this Way of Writing too much, and overchargeth his Dis∣course with Quotations. He gives a diverting and chearful Air to the roughest Questions, and explains the most intricate Difficulties with great Clearness. His Commentaries upon the Scrip∣ture are written in a Style very different from his other Works. Those Flowers, and that Orna∣ment before named, are banished from them, and the Text is explained with Simplicity and Clearness, as he says himself in several places: For he saith in his Questions to Damasus, He that treateth of the holy Scripture, should not borrow Aristotle's subtle Reasonings, nor use Tully's Eloquence, or the Flowers of Quintillian to refresh his Reader with his Declamations. His Discourse should be plain and vulgar. It is not necessary that it should be composed with Care; it is sufficient that it expounds the Things, and discovers the Sence of the Scripture and clears its Ob∣scurities. Let others be eloquent, and by that get Commendations and Applause; let them thunder out great Words in a plausible Harangue, for my part I am satisfied to speak so as I may be understood, and discoursing of the holy Scripture, I strive to imitate its Simplicity. So much of his Style. His Genius was hot and vehement; he fell upon his Adversaries with fierceness, made them ridiculous by his Jests, trampled upon them with Terms of Contempt, and made them blush with Reproaches. Though he was very Learned, yet there is infinitely more liveli∣ness and Vehemency in his Exhortations and Polemical Works than Exactness and Solidity. He knew a great deal, but he never argued upon Principles, which made him sometimes contradict himself. He often carries his Subject too far, being transported with his ordinary Heat, he commends, blames, condemns and approves of things according to the Impression which they make upon his Imagination. He is more moderate and just in his Commentaries, but not al∣ways exact, because he did not think enough, but contented himself with dictating to his A∣manuenses (as he owns himself) either what he had read in other Mens Commentaries, or lear∣ned from the Jews. He often sets down the Expositions of different Commentators, without altering any thing, and without naming those from whom he took them: Nay, he introduced such Explications as he did not approve himself, though without refuting them; being persuaded that it was enough that he had given notice to his Reader, that in his Commentaries there were se∣veral Explications which he copied out of others. Thus he excused himself of some Errors that were imputed to him, because they were found in his Commentaries. This Advertisement may serve also to vindicate him from several Errors and Contradictions which may be found in his Commentaries. In this manner he justifieth himself against Rufinus, who upbraided him for teaching in his Commentary upon the Epistle to the Ephesians. Origen's Opinions of the

Resurrection, the Prae-existence of Souls, and of the Deliverance of Devils and Damned Men. He does not deny that these Opinions are in his Commentaries; but he asserts, that they are set down in Origen's Name, and not in his own; and consequently, that they ought not to be imputed to him. It is an extraordinary thing however, that having produced these Opinions of Origen with∣out declaring against them, he should afterwards look upon them as Criminal in Origen, and con∣demn them as very dangerous Errors. But what may seem yet more strange, is, that himself hath uttered something like it in his Commentary upon the 66th. Chapter of Isaiah; where he really acknowledges, that the Punishments of Devils, Infidels, and impious Men, that know not God, are never to end; but he saith, That as for Sinners and impious Men that are Christians, whose Works are to be tried and purified by the Fire, the Judge's Sentence will be moderate, and temper'd with Clemency. I know this place is understood of Purgatory and Venial Sins; but S. Jerom's Words seem to imply something more, since the name of Impious Christians cannot be given to those who are guilty of Venial Sins only, and deserve no more than Purgatory. Se∣veral such things may be found in the Commentary upon the 4th. Chapter of Amos, in the first Book against the Pelagians, and in the Commentary upon the Prophet Nahum, where he says, That God granted pardon to those that perished in the Flood, as well as to the Sodomites, Egyp∣tians, and other Sinners, who were punished in this World for their Crimes; according to this Rule of the Prophet, That God will not punish twice for the same Sin. Several other particular Opinions of Origen, are to be met with in this Father's Commentaries, which he seems to ap∣prove of. He teaches in his Treatise of the Prodigal Son, that the Angels may sin. Upon the Epistle to Titus, he affirms that they were before the Creation of the World. Upon the Prophet Micah, That they shall be present at the last Judgment. Upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, That Christ died for them. Upon Ecclesiastes, That the Sun and the Stars have Souls; and ma∣ny other Notions of this kind which he rejected himself when he refuted Origen.

In S. Jerom's Commentaries there are also several Opinions that savour of Jewish Superstitions, or the too great credulity of the first Christians: As when he asserteth in the Commentaries upon the Prophets, Daniel and Micah, That the World shall last but One thousand years; or, when he saith in his Commentary upon the Prophet Habakkuk. That God's particular Providence ex∣tends only to Men; and that all other Creatures are governed by a general Providence, without God's having a distinct knowledge of each Event: Or, when by too much scrupulosity he con∣demns all Oaths, as he doth in his Commentary upon the 5th. of S. Matthew, and upon the 2d. Chapter of Zachary: Or, when he forbids Christians to pay Tribute to Heathen Princes, upon S. Matthew, Chapt. the 7th. Or, when he pretends that the Name of Father is to be given to no Man, in the Commentary upon the Epistle to the Galatians, l. 2. But if he is too scrupulous in these places, in others he seems to be a little too free; as, when in his Commentary upon Jonas, he advises and approves the Action of such as kill themselves to preserve their Chastity. Perhaps some persons will not think him less to blame in his Commentary upon the 23d. of S. Matthew, where he disapproves the Action of some devout Women, who, in imitation of the Pharisees, bound about their Necks, Books of the Gospel, or Crosses, or other Marks of Devotion * 1.102. Lastly, He sometimes giveth Allegorical Sences to things which are to be understood literally; as, when in the Commentary upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, he saith, That Jacob's Wrestling with the An∣gel, is not to be understood literally of a corporeal and visible Combat, but mystically of an in∣visible and spiritual Fight: Yet he is angry that Men should say that Hell-fire is not a real fire, and that the Scripture makes use of that word by a Metaphor; or, that what is said of the Earthly Paradise, is not to be understood Literally, but Allegorically. These are some of the Faults that have been taken notice of in S. Jerom's Commentaries, and which crept in by the too great preci∣pitation with which he wrote them.

His Polemical Treatises are written with more care. But as he indulges his ordinary heat too much, so he falleth into those extreams for which he hath been often blamed. As for example; when he disputeth with Helvidius, he commendeth Virginity to that excess, that it was thought, he designed to condemn Matrimony; and his Book having scandalized many, himself was obliged to apologize for it, and moderate the terms which he had used before. When he undertakes to abate the pride of Deacons, who would make themselves equal with Priests; he so exalteth the Dignity of the latter, that he seems not to think them inferior to Bishops. He discourseth after such a manner of Virginity, as would almost perswade Men that it is necessary to lead that sort of life to be saved. Labour, Fastings, Austerities, with other Mortifications, Solitude and Pil∣grimages, make up the subject of almost all his Advices and Exhortations. His delight was to write and hear of the Lives of Monks and Hermits, and he easily believed whatsoever was told him upon that subject, though never so extraordinary.

Most of S. Jerom's Writings being either Critical or Moral, there is very little Dogmatical con∣cerning the main Points of Christianity to be met with in them: Besides, he flourished in a time wherein the Disputes concerning the Trinity and Incarnation were over: The Arian and Apolli∣narian Heresies having been rejected, and those of Nestorius and Eutyches not being yet risen.

the Pelagian Heresie brake out towards the latter end of this Father's Life, which he undertook to refute immediately, with as much vigour, as he could have done in his earlier years. He shew∣ed the Necessity of Christ's help, and the Impossibility of living in this World without Sin; and free from Passions, against that Heretick: However, he doth not weaken the strength of Free-will, which consisted, in his Opinion, in a free choice, either to follow or to reject God's Call. He went no further into the Nature of Grace, or other Difficulties about Original Sin and Predesti∣nation. He seems to think that God hath predestinated or reproved Men, because of his Eter∣nal fore-knowledge of the Good or Evil they should doe. This he teacheth in his Apology a∣gainst Rufinus, by opposing Origen's Principle, which grounded Predestination or Reprobation upon past Merits. He saith upon the 121st. Psalm, that the Prayer of Jesus Christ did not always obtain what he desired.

I shall conclude these Remarks with some Passages of S. Jerom, that express his Thoughts upon the Sacraments of the Eucharist and Penance. You ask (saith he in his Letter to Hedibia, Quest. 2.) how those words of our Saviour in S. Matthew are to be understood: I say unto you, that henceforth I will drink no more of the fruit of the Vine, untill I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom. Some grounding their Opinion upon these words, have invented a fabulous Reign of a Thousand years; wherein, they pretend, that Jesus Christ shall reign corporeally, and drink of a sort of new Wine, where∣of he has not drunk from the time of his Passion, to the end of the World. But not to trouble our selves about such Fables: Let us acknowledge, that the Bread which our Saviour brake, and gave to his Dis∣ciples, is the Body of the same Saviour. If then the Bread that came down from Heaven is the Lord's Body, and if the Wine which he gave to his Disciples is his Blood, let us reject those Jewish Fables, * 1.103 and go up with the Lord into that great and high Room [which is the Church;] let us receive at his hand the Cup, which is the New Covenant. Moses gave us not the true Bread, but our Lord Jesus Christ did; he invites us to the Feast, and is himself our Meat; he eats with us, and we eat him. We drink his Blood, we daily tread in the Sacrifices, the Grapes that are red with his Blood. He tells us again upon the same Subject, in his Commentary upon the first Chapter of the Epistle to the Corinthians, That Jesus Christ the Son of God hath given his Blood to redeem us, but that this Blood of Jesus Christ may be taken, either for his Spiritual and Divine Flesh; whereof he saith himself, My Flesh is Meat indeed, and my Blood is drink indeed: Or for his Flesh that was cruci∣fied, and his Blood that was spilt in his Passion with the Soldier's Lance. The Author of the Book of the Body and Blood of Christ, that goes under Bertram's Name, quotes this last passage, which doth not prove, as some pretend, that the Flesh of Jesus Christ is not really in the Eucharist, but only that it is not there after a visible, passible, and corruptible manner, as it was upon the Cross. The Comparison, added by S. Jerom, of the Flesh of the Saints, explains his meaning. There may be found (saith he) a variety of Flesh and Blood in the Saints; so that the Flesh which shall one day see the Salvation of God, shall be different from the Flesh that shall be incapable of possessing his Kingdom. Thus, as the Flesh of Saints, in the next Life, is the same Flesh, though impassible and incorruptible; so the same Flesh of Christ, which was corruptible, and capable of suffering upon the Cross, is impassible and incorruptible in the Eucharist. There is another passage, the Exposition whereof is much controverted in the Commentary upon the Twenty-sixth Chapter of S. Matthew, where he saith, That the Lord having celebrated the Old Passover, which was a Figure of the New, passed to the true Sacrament of the Passover, that as formerly Melchisedeck, High-priest of the Almighty God, offering Bread and Wine, drew out before-hand the Figure of this Mystery; so Jesus Christ, to fulfill the same, should represent the Truth of his Body and Blood. These last words are variously rendred: The Protestants will have the word repraesentare to signifie only to represent. The Church of Rome, on the contrary, maintains, that repraesentare implies as much as to make present. This latter Sence is confirmed by the following Words: The fatted Calf which is offered, to obtain the Salvation of Repentance, is the Saviour himself, whose Flesh we daily eat, and whose Blood we daily drink. The Reader, who is one of the Faithfull, understands as well as I doe, what this nourishment is, which filling us with its abundance, makes us put forth outwardly Prai∣ses and holy Thanksgivings. This sacred Feast is daily celebrated; The Father receiveth his Son eve∣ry day, Jesus Christ is continually offered upon the Altars. In the Epistle to Pope Damasus, he saith, That there is as much difference betwixt the Loaves they offered to God in the Old Law, and the Body of Jesus Christ, in the Eucharist, as betwixt the Shadow and the Body, betwixt the Image and the Truth, and betwixt the Types and the Things they represent. Lastly, In the Epistle to Heliodorus, speaking of Priests, he saith, That they make the Body of Jesus Christ with their sacred Mouth: Qui Christi corpus Sacro ore conficiunt. In his Commentary upon Zephaniah, he seems to doubt whether wicked Priests consecrate it: But 'tis probable, that he speaks thus ra∣ther to terrifie them, than to establish a Proposition, whose Consequences would prove very dan∣gerous.

I add an excellent Passage of this Father concerning the Sacrament of Penance, taken out of his Commentary upon these Words of the 16th. Chapter of S. Matthew: Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on Earth, shall be loosed in Hea∣ven. Some (saith he) Priests and Bishops of the New Law, understanding not the sence of these words, doe imitate the pride of the Pharisees, by ascribing to themselves a power to condemn the In∣nocent, and to absolve the Guilty. But God doth not so much consider the Sentence of the Priest, as the Life of the Penitent: And as the Levites did not cleanse the Lepers, but only separated those that

were cleansed from those that were not, by the knowledge which they had of the Leprosie: Even so the Bishop, or the Priest, doth not bind those that are innocent, and loose the guilty; but having heard the difference of Sins, he knows whom to bind, and whom to loose, in the discharge of his Ministery. In this place, we may take notice, 1. Of the Custom of declaring Sins to the Priest. 2. The Power which Priests had to Absolve. 3. The use Priests were to make of the Keys, and the care they were to take not to Absolve, but such as were truly penitent * 1.104.

S. Jerom's Works were published by Erasmus, and printed in six Volumes at Basil, from the Year 1516, to the Year 1526. In 1530, they were again printed at Lions by Gryphius, and at Basil, by Froben, in 1553. The First Edition of Marianus was at Rome, by Manutius, in the Years 1565, 1571, and 1572. The Second at Paris, by Nivelle, in 1579. The Third at Ant∣werp, in 1579. The Fourth at Paris, with Gravius his Notes, in 1609. The Fifth is of 1624, at Paris. The Last was printed in 1643. These are the Collections of all this Father's Works. There are several of them printed by themselves, as the Letters in Octavo, printed at Rome by Ma∣nutius * 1.105 in 1566, at Antwerp in 1568, with Gravius's Notes, and at Mentz in 1470, at Venice in 1476, at Paris in 1583, at Dilingen in 1565, at Louvain in 1573. The Book of Famous Men, at Lou∣vain and Helmstad in 1611, at Colen in 1580, at Lions in 1617, at Antwerp in 1639. The Epistles to Theophilus at Paris in 1546, and 1589. The Book of Virginity at Rome in 1562. The Treatise of Hebrew Names at Wirtemberg in 1626. I say nothing of the Editions of the Chronicon, because they were mentioned in the Account of Eusebius his Works.

The Benedictines of the Congregation of S. Maura will soon undertake a new Edition of S. Je∣rom. There is reason to hope that it will not be inferior either in Beauty or Exactness to those of S. Augustin and S. Ambrose, which are almost compleated by the Labours of those Illustrious Monks, who make so good use both of their Time and Watchings, to enrich the Church with such glorious Works.

RUFINUS.

RUFINUS, Sir-named by some Toranus, or Tyranius a 1.106, a Priest of Aquileia b 1.107, was famous in S. Jerom's time; and after he had been one of his best Friends c 1.108, he proved * 1.109 afterwards one of his greatest Enemies. He embraced a Monastick life d 1.110, and was baptized in a Monastery about the Year 370. He went out of Rome with Melania in 372, to go into Egypt e 1.111, to visit the Monks in the Desert of Nitria; they came out of Egypt in∣to Palaestina, and dwelt 25 Years in Jerusalem, where the House of that famous Widow was the Resort and Harbour of all the Pilgrims that came to visit the holy Places. She received them with joy, kept them at her own Charges, and gave great Gifts to the Church of Jerusalem. All this time Rufinus spent his Life in the Study and Exercises of Piety. Because he understood the Greek and Latin Tongues very well, he undertook to Read and Translate the Works of Greek Authors, and especially of Origen: He conceived so high an Esteem for that Author, that he undertook ••his Defence against all Accusers. This made him fall out with S. Jerom, who took the contrary side: However, they were reconciled before Rufinus f 1.112 left Palaestina to return to Rome. But this Peace did not last long. Rufinus and Melania having tarried 25 Years in the East, resolved to go back to Rome: They took Shipping in the Year 397; and having passed by Nola, where they were very well received by S. Paulinus, Bishop of that place, they came to Rome. Some∣time after Rufinus published the Translation of the First Book of the Apology for Origen, which went under Pamphilus's Name, with a Letter to show that Origen's Works had been falsified, and a Translation of the Books of Principles, with a Preface that offended S. Jerom. This Saint wrote immediately his Apology against Rufinus, against which Rufinus composed Two Books of Invectives. This Controversie made a great noise in Rome, where both these famous Antagonists were in great credit, and had many Advocates. Rufinus kept himself quiet as long as Pope Syri∣cius lived, and received a Letter of Communion from this Pope; with which he retired into Aquileia. But after his Death, Anastasius, that succeeded him, cited Rufinus to appear before him; but he not appearing, only excusing himself by an Apology, was condemned without Mercy; so that he could not preserve his Dignity of Presbyter in Aquileia, where he abode till the Visigoths spoiled Italy in 409, when he was forced to retire into Sicily, where he died in the Year 410 g 1.113.

Rufinus wrote Two sorts of Books, Translations of Greek Authors, and Books of his own ma∣king.

The Greek Translations are the greatest and most considerable part of his Labours; for, as Gen∣nadius says, he gave the Latins a great many of the Greek Books. The Catalogue of them is this:

The Twenty Books of Jewish Antiquities, by Flavius Josephus.

The Seven Books of the Jewish War.

Two Books against Appion of the same Author.

Eusebius his Ecclesiastical History, reduced into Nine Books, and Translated with great Li∣berty h 1.114. The Books of Recognitions i 1.115, attributed to S. Clement, with a Preface.

The Sentences k 1.116 of Sixtus the Pythagorean, which he had falsely ascribed to Pope Sixtus the Second of that Name.

The Book of Origen's Principles; 17 Homilies of the same Author upon Genesis; 12 Homilies upon Exodus; 16 Homilies upon Leviticus; 28 Homilies upon Numbers, 26 Homilies upon Joshua; 9 Homilies upon the Book of Judges; the first Homily upon the Book of Kings; 9 Ho∣milies upon the Psalms, and Commentaries upon the Epistle to the Romans; and a Letter of Ori∣gen's, where he complains of his Book's having been corrupted.

The first Book of Pamphilus's Apology for Origen.

The Orations of S. Gregory Nazianzen: The Ascetical Rules of S. Basil, and some other Trea∣tises of both these Fathers of the Church.

The Sentences of Evagrius Ponticus; and some other Treatises of this Author. He Translated besides, if we believe Gennadius, a Treatise of Pamphilus's against the Mathematicians * 1.117: And S. Jerom observes, that he had published an Arian's Book under the Name of Theophilus the Mar∣tyr; but neither of these Books are extant.

Rufinus gave himself a great deal of liberty in his Translations, and kept more to the Sence which he judged ought to be given to Authors, than to their Words. In a word, his Translati∣ons are Paraphrases, rather than literal and faithfull Versions. He hath used much freedom, par∣ticularly in Eusebius's History, and in Origen's Treatises, where he hath changed, added and struck out many things, as he acknowledgeth himself. But if these Translations be not sincere, they are eloquent enough, and they have that clearness which makes them pleasing to the Reader.

The Works of Rufinus's own Composition, are these.

Two Books of Ecclesiastical History, which he hath added to the Translation of Eusebius his Books; wherein he continues the History of the Church, to the Death of Theodosius the Emperor. These Books are dedicated to Chromatius of Aquileia, and were written at the same time that Alaric, King of the Goths, wasted Italy. They were Translated into Greek by Gelasius of Caesa∣rea. They are pretty well written, but there are many Historical faults l 1.118

A Discourse to prove, that Origen's Books have been falsified; published at Rome in 397, with the Translation of Origen's Book of Principles, and of Pamphilus's Apology.

Two Books against S. Jerom's Apology, entituled Invectives.

In the former, to justifie his Doctrine against the Accusations of S. Jerom, he produces that Creed, and that Doctrine which he had learned at Aquileia above Thirty years before, from Chro∣matius, Jovinian and Eusebius; he observeth, that in his Church they did not only profess in their Creed to believe the Resurrection of the Flesh, carnis resurrectionem; but that they added, of this Flesh, hujus carnis resurrectionem.

To the end, saith he, that making the Sign of the Cross upon our Brother, as is usually done at the end of the Creed, we may make a publick profession, that we believe the Resurrection of the same Flesh which we now touch.

He uses

this Confession for his Justification against S. Jerom, from the Accusation of being in an error in the point of the Resurrection of the Flesh, and of not believing that Man should rise again with his whole Flesh. He affirms, that he is wrongfully accused of that Error; for his Opinion is, that the whole Body shall rise again with its Members; but that it shall be glorious and immortal, and shall be no more subject to Corruption, and other infirmities of mortal and corruptible Flesh.

After this he answers what was objected against him, that he entertained Heretical Opinions concerning the Trinity. He shews, that his Doctrine in that point cannot be suspected of Error: That if through inadvertency he hath let pass in the Translation of Origen's Principles, any passage wherein he seems to say that the Son sees not the Father, and that the Holy Ghost sees not the Son, he should not for all that be accused of Error, since in so many places he professes the con∣trary: That if they had charitably warned him of it, he would have either blotted out or altered it, as he had done the others, which he found to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church, con∣cerning the Trinity. He complains also, that Paulinianus had poisoned the Translation of that place, making him say, That it was neither impious or abs••rd to say that the Son sees not the Fa∣ther; whereas he had only said, That he would afterwards give a reason of the Sence, in which it might be said, That the Person of the Father was invisible.

After that he repelleth all S. Jerom's reproachfull Allegations, declaring that S. Jerom himself had formerly commended Origen, Translated his Works, and that in his Commentaries there were the same Errors concerning the Nature of the Flesh, when risen again; the Prae-existence of Souls, and the end of the Torments of the Devils, and the Damned; for which Reason he found fault that Origen's Books were Translated. This he sheweth by long Extracts out of different Commentaries of this Father.

The Second Book of Rufinus's Invective is concerning the personal Reproaches which he utters against S. Jerom. First he charges him with tearing the Reputation of Christians of all States and Conditions, in his Book of Virginity, and with blaming their Manners at such a rate, that Pa∣gans and Apostates enquired diligently after that Book, to make use of it against the Church. Se∣condly, he accuses him of Perjury, because after a solemn Oath to read the Books of profane Au∣thors no more, he ceased not to read and make use of them in his Works: Particularly he takes notice of a passage in his Treatise of Virginity, wherein he pretends that S. Jerom spake of God after an irreverent manner. He laughs at S. Jerom, for boasting that he was Didymus's Disciple, for having had one Month's Conversation with him. He jests upon him for taking as his Teachers, Porphyry the Philosopher, and Barrabas the Jew. He quoteth several places of his Writings, to prove, that he not only commended the Erudition and Learning of Origen, but that he approved his Doctrine also. He accuseth him of striking out of his Chronicon, what he had said before in fa∣vour of Melania. He reproveth him for the low esteem he had of the Septuagint. He finds fault with his contemptuous rejecting the Story of their 70 Cells. He blames him for not own∣ing the History of Susanna for Canonical. Lastly, he makes it Criminal in S. Jerom to Translate the Bible a-new. This Invective is written with much address and vehemence. He composed it in the Year 399.

Sometime after he writ his Apology to Pope Anastasius; wherein having expounded his belief of the Trinity, the Resurrection, the last Judgment, and the Torment of Eternal fire for the De∣vils, in a very Catholick manner; he declares that he was uncertain of the Origination of Souls, having observed that Ecclesiastical Authors were not agreed upon that Subject; That some, with Tertullian and Lactantius, believed that they were formed with the Bodies; That others, as Ori∣gen, were of opinion, that they were created with the World, and that God infused them into Bodies; and Lastly, That others affirmed that God both created and placed them in the Bodies at the same time; and so, not knowing which of these Opinions was the truest, he remitted the decision to God, not being able to be positive concerning any more than what the Church teaches, That God is the Creator of Souls and Bodies.

Having thus given an account of his Doctrine, he justifies himself of the Objections made a∣gainst him for Translating Origen's Books. He saith, that it is very plain, that it was Envy only that made them condemn that Undertaking; That if there is any thing displeasing in the Au∣thor, the Translator is not to be charged therewith, who has barely delivered the Sence of the Author. That he had prevented the inconveniency that might have happened, by striking out the Errors which he conceived to have been added in Origen's Books; That he had given notice of it in his Preface; so that they were much to blame to accuse and calumniate him upon that Subject:

For, saith he, when will Simplicity and Innocency be secured against Envy and Slaundering, if they be not upon this occasion? I neither justifie nor approve Origen, but I Translated him, and so did many others before me; I am the last, and that at the request of my friends. If such a Translation is not acceptable, be it so, I will Translate no more.

He concludes, by assuring the Pope, That he neither has, nor ever had any other Sentiments than these he hath now declared, and which are those of the Church's of Rome, Alexandria and Aqui∣leia; telling him withall, That such as through Envy or Jealousie against their Brethren, do oc∣casion Scandals and Divisions, shall give an account at the Judgment-seat of God.

The Exposition of the Creed directed to Laurentius, which is found amongst the Works of S. Cyprian, and of S. Jerom, is likewise Rufinus's Work. Gennadius who was one of the most zealous Defenders of this Author, saith he hath done extremely well in this piece, and that all other Ex∣positions of the Creed are not to be compared with it; and indeed it would be hard to find a more compleat Treatise upon the Creed than this.

He observes in the beginning, the difficulty of that Undertaking, because it was very dangerous to speak of Mysteries; That some famous Authors had already written, but very succinctly upon that Subject: That Photinus had chosen that way to establish his Heresie: but his design was to expound the Creed with simplicity, by keeping to the very terms of the Scripture, so to supply what had been omitted by those that writ before him. Then he declares, that the Apostles had Conference together to compose the Creed, before they divided, that so they might teach all whom they should convert by the same common Creed; That it is called Symbolum, either because it is the result of a Conference betwixt several Persons, or because it is the Mark of distinction, where∣by Christians are known. Afterwards he examines all the Articles, and observes the several ways of repeating them in different Churches. He clears their Sence in a very plain manner, and con∣firms it by the most opposite passages in the Holy Scripture. In explaining the Article of the Catholick Church, he gives a Catalogue of the Canonical Books, of the Old and New Testa∣ment, and admits into the Canon of the Old Testament, none but the Books owned by the He∣brews: But he says, That there are other Books read in Churches, which are not made use of to confirm Articles of Faith, and he calls them Ecclesiastical Books. These Books in the Old Te∣stament are; Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Judith, the Maccabees, and in the New Testament, the Book of Hermas, and S. Peter's Judgment. He observes further upon the same Article, that there is but one Church: and in few words he condemns most of the Sects that have separated from it; He enlarges much upon the last Article concerning the Resurrection of the Body, observing again in this place, that the Church of Aquileia had added, of this Body, and that they made the sign of the Cross in the Conclusion of the Creed.

The Exposition of Jacob's Blessing is the first Book that is Printed under Rufinus's Name, in the Collection of his Works. This Treatise was written at Paulinus's request; which made Isidore to attribute it to Paulinus, tho' it be composed by Rufinus, as Gennadius assures us: It is divided into two Books. In the first he explains Judah's Blessing, and in the second, that of the rest of Jacob's Children. He particularly keeps to the Historical Sence, without neglecting either the Mystical or the Moral: He shews, That this Patriarch's Prophecies are fulfilled, either in the Church, or in the Jewish Tribes.

He follows the same method in his Commentaries upon the Prophets Hosea, Joel and Amos. These Commentaries are clear and neat: He expounds his Text after an elegant but natural way without intangling himself with Allegories, hard Questions, or long Digressions. He tells us in the Preface, That he had made some Commentaries upon Solomon's Books, and that he designed to do the like upon all the lesser Prophets. He desires the Reader to take Notice, That he made use of the-last Translation which is conformable to the Hebrew Text, but that he had but little help from other Men's Works in his Commentaries.

For, saith he, the Latins seem to have been agreed to write nothing upon the Minor Prophets. Some Greek and Syrian Authors indeed have endeavoured to expound their Prophecies; and I confess I have read upon those Books some Commentaries of S. John Bishop of Constantinople; but, his Custom was, he composed them rather for Exhortations to his Auditors, than for Expositions of the Scripture Text. Ori∣gen after his peculiar way, entertained his Readers with delightful Allegories, but takes no pains to give the Historical Sence; which is the only thing that is solid. S. Jerom, a Man of vast Parts, and throughly learned, hath written Commentaries upon those Prophets, but he so much insist∣ed upon the Jewish Traditions, that he took no pains to find out the Sence of the Prophecies by their Events. So that his Commentaries are wholly made up, either of Origen's Allegories, or of Jewish Traditions.

This is Rufinus his Judgment of others; and it must be confessed, that he hath avoided what he reproves in the Commentaries of others, and that his is more useful for the understanding of the Historical Sence of the Prophecies. It is strange that Gennadius should make no mention of these Commentaries; but the Stile and the Circumstances sufficiently discover them to be composed by Rufinus: Tho' some have doubted it.

We have only now to speak of the Commentaries upon the Seventy five first Psalms, which were Printed by themselves at Lyons, in the Year 1570. but they cannot belong to Rufinus, because there are whole Periods taken out of S. Augustin's Commentaries upon the Psalms m 1.119, and out of S. Gregory's Morals. Gennadius speaks of several Letters of Piety written by Rufinus, among which he gives the first place to those that are written to Proba, but they are not now extant.

It must be acknowedged, That Rufinus, tho' very ill used by S. Jerom, was one of the ablest Men of his time: Perhaps he had not so much Learning as S. Jerom, but his Temper was better and less violent. He doth not write so good Latin, but his Stile is more even. It cannot be denied, but that the Latin Church is obliged to him for the knowledge of the most considerable among the Greek Authors; and particularly of Church-History. Tho' he was accused of divers Errors, yet he was convicted of none, and he justified himself sufficiently of the reproachful Obje∣ctions made against him. He defended Origen, but that was by rejecting the Errors Father'd upon him. The only Thing he may be thought to have been guilty of, not upon the Score of his own Writings, but by the Testimony of the Authors that have spoken of him, is that he was Pelagius's Tutor. But perhaps the Disciples Errors may have been imputed to the Master, tho' he never taught them. However it cannot be said, That he divided from the Church upon that occasion, or that these Errors were obstinately maintained by him. And so, in my Opinion, it is very unjust for modern Writers, to blemish the Memory of him, and use him, as if he had been one of the greatest Hereticks in the World. We should not mind all the Accusations where∣with S. Jerom loaded him in the heat of their Quarrel: but rather imitate the Modesty of Pope Gelasius, who gives him the Character of an Holy Man; Rufinus vir religiosus. Tho' he con∣fesses, That S. Jerom was in the right when he reproved him, for what he said concerning Man's Free-Will.

The Works of this Author have been collected into one Volume in Folio, and Printed at Paris ••y Sonnius in 1580. They forgot to insert the two Invectives, and the Apology to Pope Anastasius, with the letter concerning the falsifying of Origen's Books, which are in the last Volume of S. Je∣rom's Works. His Translations are in the ancient Latin Editions of those Greek Authors, which were made publick before new Translations were made.

SOPHRONIUS.

SOPHRONIUS a Man of great Erudition, says his Friend S. Jerom, in his Book of Famous Men, writ when he was little more than a Child, the Praise of Bethlehem, and not long * 1.120 ago composed an excellent Treatise of the ruin of Serapis: He translated also into Greek, my Treatise of Virginity to Eustochium, and the Life of Hilarion the Hermit: He likewise tur∣ned into Greek the Latin Translation of the Psalms, and Prophets, which I made from the He∣brew Text.

The Greek Translation of the Book of Famous Men, is also attributed to him. There is another Sophronius Bishop of Jerusalem, who lived under the Emperor Heraclius about the year 636, to whom is ascribed a small Treatise of the Labours and Travels of S. Peter, and of S. Paul: It is a miserable business not worth mentioning.

SEVERUS SULPICIUS.

SEVERUS SULPICIUS, a 1.121 Priest of Agen b 1.122, famous for the Nobility of his Ex∣traction, the Fineness of his Parts, and the Holiness of his Life, was eminent in the times of * 1.123 S. Jerom, and Rufinus, he was S. Martin's Disciple, whose Life he writ; He was an intimate Friend of Paulinus Bishop of Nola, to whom he writ several Letters. This Man speaking of Se∣verus's Conversion in one of his Letters, saith, That it was altogether extraordinary and miracu∣lous;

Because he had at once shaken off the Yoke of sin, and broken the Bands of Flesh and Blood, in the flower of his Age; and at a time when he was famous at the Bar, when neither Riches, nor a Licence to enjoy Pleasures after Marriage, nor his Youth could turn him out of the Way of Vertue, to ingage in the broad and easie Path of worldly Men: That he despised Wealth and Glory to follow Jesus Christ, and preferred the preaching of Fisher-men, before

all the pieces of Ciceronian Eloquence, and all the Books of fine Learning: However, he shew∣ed his Eloquence in the Writings which he composed after his Conversion.

The chief of these Works is his Sacred History divided into two Books, which contains an Abridg∣ment of what remarkable things happened in the History of the Jews, and of the Church, from the Creation of the World, to the Consulship of Stilico, and Aurelianus, that is, to the Year of Jesus Christ 400, written with great Skill. He wrote also S. Martin's Life, three Letters concer∣ning the Death, and Vertues of that Saint, and three Dialogues betwixt Gallus and Posthumianus, whereof the first is concerning the Miracles of the Eastern Monks, and the two others about S. Mar∣tin's Vertues. Gennadius saith, That he writ some pious Letters besides to his Sister, two Letters to S. Paulinus, that were common in his time, not to speak of several others, which were not published because they were intermixt with Domestick Affairs. F. Dachery in the Fifth Volume of his Spi∣cilegium, hath published us five Letters of Severus Sulpicius to his Sister, and Baluzius hath like∣wise published two in the First Volume of his Miscellanea. The others are not yet published.

Gennadius affirms, That Sulpicius Severus towards the latter end of his Life, was surprized by the Pelagians, but that afterwards having acknowledged the Error, which he was fallen into, by too great a desire of speaking, he kept Silence all the rest of his days, that he might repair his Fault. Guibertus Abbot of Gemblours, seems to question the matter of Fact. But Gennadius his Testimony is not to be questioned in such a matter: Sulpicius Severus lived till towards the Year 420.

This Author is eloquent, his Writings are pure and polished, he writ with great Brevity, and great Clearness, wherein he excelled Sallust whom he imitated. His is the best written Historical Abridgment that we have, and yet he is not very exact, but commits Faults against the truth of History, especially of the Ecclesiastical. He is very credulous of Miracles, and approves the Dreams of the Ancients about the Reign of a Thousand years, about Anti-Christ, whom he thought to be Nero, about the time of the World's end, and about the Sons of Men that had to do with the Women. He passes over the Church History from Jesus Christ, to the Fourth Century, very lightly; he saith very little of the Arians, but he inlargeth much upon the Priscillianists, and from him we learn more of them than from all the Authors besides.

The Life of S. Martin is written with the same Purity as his History; but in a more diffuse and agreeable manner. The Dialogues are composed with so much Art and Exactness, that one can never be weary of reading them, and particularly the first, where Posthumianus relates several par∣ticulars of the Eastern Monks. He speaks there of the Troubles that were in Egypt, and Palae∣stine, about Origen's Books, and makes a most wise and moderate Judgment of them, and tho' he does not wholly excuse Origen; Yet he does not approve of that Severity, which the Bishop of Alexandria exercised against those that defended him. He bewails the misfortune of the Church to be disturbed with things of so small Importance. He commends S. Jerom without entirely applauding his Conduct. He quotes a Jest of a good Priest of the Coast of Africa, who refused to take Money offered him by Posthumianus, saying, That Gold did rather destroy the Church than edifie it.

The Works of Sulpicius Severus, which Lazius had published full of Faults, were revised and corrected by Giselinus, who Printed them with his own Notes, and with Galesinius's at Ant∣werp, in the Year 1574. Sigonius made a new Edition of them with new Notes, Printed at Bo∣nonia in 1581, and at Francfort in 1593. The History was printed with Drusius's at Franker in 1607. There is an Edition by Elzevir at Amsterdam in 1635. And we have him entire with the Notes of several learned Men, Printed at Amsterdam, by Hornius his care in 1647, and 1654. These are the principal Editions of Sulpicius Severus, to say nothing of the Collections, into which his Works have been inserted.

In speaking of Sulpicius Severus who writ S. Martin's Life, it is worth observing that a Creed is ascribed to this Saint, but it is very uncertain, whether he be the Author of it, tho' it is very ancient.

Saint PAULINUS.

SAint PAULINUS, called also Pontius, and Meropius, descended from an illustrious Fa∣mily of Roman Senators, was born at Bourdeaux about the Year 453. He was directed in * 1.124 his Studies by the famous Ausonius; he studied with so much Assiduity the best of the Latin Authors, that he got a stile very like theirs. He advanced afterwards to the most con∣siderable Offices of the Empire. Ausonius says that Paulinus was Consul along with him, but his Name being not found in the Fasti consulares, it is probable that he obtained that Dig∣nity only in the Room of some other Person, who died in the Office, and perhaps in the Year 378, after the Death of Valens. He married Therasia a rich Woman, by whom he got a great Estate, The Happiness that a Person so powerful and rich as he was, might have enjoyed, was much disturb∣ed by abundance of Businesses, which made him recollect himself, and resolve to be converted. and to retire into Spain with his Wife Therasia, who had contributed much to make him take this Resolution. He was baptized by Delphinus Bishop of Bourdeaux some time before his retreat, in the Year 389. He dwelt Four years in Spain, where he embraced voluntary Poverty, selling his Goods by degrees to give them to the Poor. The Inhabitants of Barcelona, where he dwelt conceived such Esteem for him, that they caused him to be ordained Priest upon Christmas-day, tho' he thought not of it. S. Paulinus perceiving that he could not overcome the People's Re∣solution, after a long resistance, yielded to be ordained, upon condition that he should not be obliged to remain in Barcelona, because his Design was to withdraw to Nola. This Ordination was performed in 393, and the next Year, he left Spain to go into Italy. In his way he saw S. Am∣brose at Florence, who shewed him some Marks of Respect: at Rome he was kindly received both by Persons of Quality, and by the People: but Pope Siricius, and the Clergy were jealous of him, which made him leave that Town quickly, and repair to Nola, where he dwelt in a Countrey house half a League from the Town; having lived there Sixteen years with his Wife Therasia, in the Study and Exercises of a Monastical Life, he was chosen and ordained Bishop of Nola in 409. The beginning of his Promotion was disturbed by the Incursions of the Goths, who took the City of Nola; this Assault being over, he enjoy'd his Bishoprick peaceably to his dying day, in the Year 431. We read in S. Gregory's Dialogues, that he yielded himself to be a Captive in Africa voluntarily, to deliver a Widow's Son that was taken by the Vandals: but this Action which did not agree, either with the Circumstances, or the time of S. Paulinus's Life, is looked upon by the Learned as a Fable, as several others are, which may be found in S. Gregory's Dia∣logues.

There was a new Edition lately made of this Father's Poems and Letters, wherein they are set very exactly in a Chronological Order.

The first Letter is written by Paulinus to Sulpicius Severus, sometime after he was ordained a Priest; there he exhorteth Sulpicius Severus to continue in that sort of Life, which he had em∣braced, without being disturbed at the Discourses of the Men of the World that blamed him. He invites him to come to him at Barcelona, and acquaints him after what manner he was or∣dained Priest.

Upon Christmas-day, saith he, the People obliged me to receive the Order of Priesthood, against my Will: not that I have any Aversion to that Dignity; on the contrary, I could wish to have began at the Porter's order to come into the Clergy: but as my Design looked another way, so I was surprized and established at that new Order of the Divine Pro∣vidence. I submitted my self to Christ's Yoke, and am now engaged in a Ministery beyond my Merit and my Strength..... I can hardly yet comprehend the heavy weight of that Dig∣nity: I tremble when I consider the Importance of that Office, being conscious to my self of my own weakness: but he that giveth Wisdom to the Simple, and causeth sucking Babes to sing his Praises, is able to accomplish his work in me, to give me his Grace, and make me wor∣thy, whom he has called when I was unworthy.

He addeth, That he took Orders upon this condition, that he should not be tyed to the Church of Barcelona, so that he consecrated him∣self to the Holy Ministery, without being bound to the Service of any particular Church. He in∣vites him at last not to put off his Journey, but to come to him before Easter.

The Second Letter to Amandus a Priest, afterwards Bishop of Bourdeaux is written like∣wise concerning that Ordination, at the same time with the first. He intreats him to give him Advice and necessary Instructions, for the worthy discharging of his Ministery.

The Third to Alypius Bishop in Africa, was written immediately after his Arrival at Nola, in the Autumn of the Year 394. He commends there S. Augustin's Books which Alypius had sent him; he sends him Eusebius his Chronicon, and tells him, That he was very desirous to know the particulars of his Life: and at the latter end of the Letter, he says, That he sent him a Loaf as a Token of their Union, and a Figure of the Trinity, adding, That he shall make an Eulogy, of that Bread when he receives it, that is, That in receiving it he shall bless it, as he says in the following Letter to S. Augustin. It was the Custom of that time, especially with S. Paulinus thus to send Bread as a mark of Union: See the 1st. 4th. 45th. and 46th. Letters. S. Augustin in the 34th. Letter speaks likewise of a Loaf, which he sent to Paulinus, and makes use of the same

expression; The Bread, saith he, which we send unto you, shall be made a subject of Blessing, by the Charity wherewith you shall receive it. UBERIOR BENEDICTIO FIET DI∣LECTIONE ACCIPIENTIS VESTRAE BENIGNITATIS.

The Fourth is written to S. Augustin; he commends his Five Books against the Manichees which Alypius had sent him: It is full of Expressions, to shew how greatly he esteemed S. Au∣gustin, of whom he craves advice for his Behaviour: both these Letters were written in Autumn, in the Year 394, as appears by the Sixth. S. Augustin answers this last by the 27th. Letter of the last Edition, which is there in the Italick Letter.

S. Paulinus's Fifth Letter is directed to Sulpicius Severus, wherein he returns him Thanks for the Testimonies of Love that he had received from him: He exalts his Conversion; and comparing it with his own, shews that it was more surprizing and wonderfull. There he also speaks of his Distemper, and of the Envy which the Roman Clergy bore to all men, of any Reputation either for their Holiness or their Piety: and alledgeth this as a Reason of his withdrawing far from Rome; He opposes Pope Siricius his proud Behaviour towards him, Papae urbici superba duritia, to that Charity wherewith both the Bishops and Clergy of Campania, had entertained him by their frequent Visits, and to that of the African Bishops, who had sent on purpose to know how he did.

The Sixth Letter is written to S. Augustin in the Year 395, wherein he expresseth how impa∣tient he was to receive some Letters from him.

The following Letter is an Answer of S. Augustin's which is the Thirty first of his Letters, writ∣ten in 396. He sends Paulinus word of his Promotion to be a Bishop.

Paulinus having received this Letter, acquaints Romanianus by the Seventh, with his great joy for that News.

In the Eighth he exhorteth Licentius Romanianus his Son, in Prose and in Verse, to leave the World and give himself to God. These Letters are of the Year 396.

In the Eleventh of the following Year, as is supposed, he urges Severus Sulpicius to come to see him.

The Twelfth to Amandus is one of the most excellent of all S. Paulinus his Letters. There he very elegantly explains the Degrees of Man's Fall, and of the Redemption by Jesus Christ, observing that God had preserved Holiness in the posterity of Seth; that in the time of the Flood, The Spirit of Holiness rested in one only righteous Man, who was then the Redeemer of Mankind, and a Type of the Redemption through Christ: That after the Flood men returning to Corruption, God chose Abraham to be the Father of the Faith∣ful, of whom should come the everlasting King, and that at last all mankind being so cor∣rupted with Vice, that hardly any Remedy could be hoped for; the same Lord who formed Man, came to restore him by the same power by which he had created him: That he made himself Man to be a Mediator betwixt God and Men: That he was humble, and had chosen the vile things in this World to confound the Proud, the Learned and the mighty things of the Age: And at last he died and rose again, to destroy Death in us, and restore Immortality. These are the main Points explained very exactly by S. Paulinus in that Letter. At the latter end he takes notice that there is both Humility, and a laudable Pride. That Pride, saith he, is to be approved, which makes us despise the World, and neglect whatsoever seemeth great handsome and pleasing to the Eyes of Men, apply our selves only to heavenly things, and stoop to nothing but God's Commandments, &c. on the other side, That that Humility is to be condemned, which hath not Faith for its Foundati∣tion, but only such a Littleness of mind as serves for lying, and is an Enemy to truth, which makes us loose our Liberty, and become the Slaves of Vice; which mingles Wine with Water, That is, to say, which weakens the pure truth, by a base Complaceny. MEND ACII FAMULA VERI∣TATIS INIMICA MISCENS AQUA VINUM, ID EST, VERITATIS MERUM AQUOSO ADULATONIS ENERVANS.

The Thirteenth is a Letter of Consolation to Pammachius upon the Death of Paulina his Wife in 397, wherein having exhorted him to stop his Tears, and moderate his Sorrow, he commends his great Charity to the poor of the City of Rome.

In the Fourteenth and Fifteenth to Delphinus, and Amandus, S. Paulinus testifies his joy for Del∣phinus's Recovery, who had been dangerously Sick, giving him thanks for the Service he had done to Basilius the Priest. In the first upon occasion of Delphinus his Sickness, he saith, That the Afflictions of the Righteous are profitable. 1. For the Exercise of their Vertue, 2. To keep them from Pride. 3. To imprint in them the fear of God's Justice, which will grievously punish the Impious, since it deals so severely with the Righteous.

The Sixteenth Letter to Jovius, is an excellent Discourse of Providence. It is placed in 399.

In the Seventeenth to Severus Sulpicius, he complains that he came not to see him, neither met him at Rome, whither he was gone to celebrate the Feast of the Apostles S. Peter, and S. Paul; He exhorts him to come into that Countrey, to Honour S. Foelix the Martyr. This Letter was written by S. Paulinus at the latter end of the Year 399, after a Recovery from Sickness.

The Eighteenth is written to Victricius Bishop of Rouen, he sent it by Paschasius his Deacon whom he found at Rome, and had brought to Nola. Having excused himself for detaining him so long, he makes a Panegyrick upon Victricius, describing the Torments which he had suffered for the Faith of Jesus Christ. This Letter is of the same Date with the foregoing.

The Three following to Delphinus Bishop of Bourdeaux, were sent in the Year 400, by Carda∣mas an Exorcist, who came to visit him from that Bishop.

In the First, he shows his gratitude for the Love which that Bishop had for him: He owns him∣self to be one of that Bishop's planting, praying him that he would cultivate the same Plant by his Prayers, and water it with his Counsels. In the Second, he gives him▪ Notice of the Tokens of love and respect that had been shewed him by Anastasius Bishop of Rome, and Vene∣ris Bishop of Milan. At last having commended Cardamas, he expounds the beginning of S. John's Gospel.

In the Twenty second to Severus, He describeth the Luxury, and Effeminateness of the Men of the World, and exalteth the Frugality of the Monks, in very elegant and proper words.

Here is a very pleasant Letter from Severus to Paulinus, wherein he recommends a Cook to him, affirming that he was very fit for him, knowing exactly well how to dress a Dish of Beans, and Lettices, and one that would destroy as many Pot-Herbs as any Man he ever saw.

S. Paulinus made this Cook called Victor welcome, being so highly commended, and Paulinus was so well pleased with him, that he makes his Panegyrick in the Twenty third Letter commen∣ding him, because he cut his Hair perfectly well. He speaks of the use of Hair, and from thence takes opportunity to give an Allegorical exposition of the Histories of Sampson and Mary Magdalen.

Sulpicius Severus had written S. Paulinus a Letter wherein he commended that Saint, for di∣stributing his Estate to the Poor. S. Paulinus answers him, That it is but a small thing to renounce this World's wealth, except one also denies himself; and that a Man may quit the Goods of this World heartily, without parting with them altogether. He treateth afterwards of the Conditions of Evangelical poverty, and the dangers and temptations that attend a Spiritual life. Both these Letters are supposed to have been written about the latter end of the Year 400.

The Twenty fifth Letter is addressed to a Person of Quality, whom he exhorts to quit the World, and advises him not to deferr his Conversion.

In the Twenty sixth Letter he praises a Monk named Sebastian, and a Deacon named Bene∣dictus, upon their having worthily discharged their Duties. These two Letters are in the Ninth Tome of S. Jerom's Works, among those falsely attributed to him. They seem to have been writ∣ten in the Year 401.

The Twenty seventh Letter to Severus Sulpicius contains nothing considerable.

The Twenty eighth directed to the same, is something more usefull; there are several passages of Scripture applied to Jesus Christ with much wit and dexterity. He writes, that he sent to him by Victor, (whom he commends again in this place,) his Panegyrick of Theodosius the Emperor, and his Verses in commendation of S. Foelix the Martyr: Both these Letters are believed to be of the Year 401.

By the Twenty ninth, he thanks Severus for a Suit of Camel's Hair which he had sent him; judging, that he thereby intended to let him understand the need he had of Penance, and that in exchange he sent him a Suit of Lamb's Wool which Melania had given him; whereupon he takes occasion to commend that famous Widow, who lately passed through Nola. If this Letter was written in the same Year that Melania returned from Jerusalem, as he that writ the Notes upon it supposes, then it is of the Year 397, and not of 402, as he affirms: But there is no proof that it is of the same Year.

Sulpicius Severus had desired to have S. Paulinus's Picture. The Saint refuses to give it, and calls his Request a piece of Folly: And this puts him upon discoursing in the Thirtieth Letter of the inward and the outward Man; it is thought to be of 402. There he draws a wonderfull Picture of Man's Heart; this is one excellent passage of it, much admired of S. Augustin in his 186th. Epistle. How should I dare give you my Picture, that am altogether like the Earthly Man, and by my Actions represent the Carnal Man? Shame presseth me on every side. I am ashamed to have my Picture drawn as I am, and I dare not have it made otherwise. I hate what I am, and I am not what I would be. But what will it avail me, wretched Man, to hate Vice, and love Vertue, since I am what I hate, and my laziness hinders me from endeavouring to doe what I love? I find my self at variance with my self, and am torn by an intestine War. The Flesh fights against the Spi∣rit, and the Spirit against the Flesh. The Law of the Body opposes the Law of the Spirit. Woe is me, because I have not taken away the taste of the poisoned Tree, by that of the saving Cross. The poison communicated to all Men from our first Parent by his Sin, abideth yet in me.

About the same time Severus asked S. Paulinus to send him some Ashes of the Martyrs, to consecrate a Church: S. Paulinus having none, sent him a Bit of the true Cross, which Melania had brought from Jerusalem, with a Design to send it to Bassula, Severus his Mother-in-Law. This precious Relick was locked up in a Golden Box. Upon Occasion of this Present, he writes the History of the Invention of the Holy Cross. He says that Adrianus the Emperor caused a Temple to Jupiter to be built in the place where Christ suffered, and one to Adonis in Bethlehem to blot out the Memory, both of Christ's Birth and Passion: That these Temples stood till the time of Constantine: That the Empress Helena destroyed the Temples and Idols of false Deities, and erected Churches in those places; and that in one of them the Prints of Christ's Feet when he ascended up to Heaven were visible upon the Sand. That after this the Empress, desirous to find out where the Cross of Christ lay, sent for Christians and Jews, to learn of them the Place where it might have been hid, and that when she was shewed the Place, she caused the Ground to be opened, and contrary to all mens Expectation, having dug

deep, they found three Crosses planted in the Ground, as formerly; that the Joy of finding what they sought after, was much abated by the Difficulty of Discovering which of the three was the Cross of Christ, but that in this uncertainty it came into the Empress's Mind to bring thither a dead Corps; being perswaded that Jesus Christ would manifest by the Resurrection of that Man which of these three Crosses was his. The thing being immediately done, the Body which had been laid upon the two others (of the Thieves) to no purpose, returned to Life, as soon as the Cross of Christ touched him. He adds, That this Cross does not diminish, though Chips are constantly cut off from it.

In the Thirty second Letter to Severus, there are Verses concerning a Picture which Severus Sulpicius had placed in a Church of his own Building, which represented S. Martin and S. Pau∣linus. The latter out of Humility saith, that S. Martin represented innocent Persons; but he represented Sinners. He likewise makes a Description in Verse, of the Church which he was building at Nola; and writ Inscriptions for both Churches. Here is a Description of the Churches that were built at that time. Both these Letters are of the year 403. or thereabouts.

The following Letter to Alethius, hath nothing worth taking Notice of: but they have joined with it a Treatise directed to the same Alethius, which is one of the most Excellent Pieces in Antiquity, concerning Alm••deeds. It is intituled, of Ecclesiastical Treasure; because he shews there, that the greatest Treasure that a Man can get, and the best Gain that he can make, is to give Alms: It is Lending to God, who payeth great Use for it, and who gave Wealth to the Rich upon no other Account than that they might communicate to the Poor; as he hath made the Poor and Destitute, that the Rich might not want Opportunity of exercising Mercy and Charity. This small Treatise is full of such Notions about the Excellency and Necessity of Alms. It is believed that this Treatise was sent to Alethius, by Victor, with the foregoing Letter in 403.

In the Thirty fifth, and Thirty sixth Letters to Delphinus and Amandus, he recommends to their Prayers the Soul of his Brother, whom he had formerly baptized, desiring them not to forget it. Delphinus being dead in 404. as appears by S. Paulinus's Twenty seventh Poem. The Date of this Letter cannot be set backwarder.

Victricius Bishop of Rouen, having been at Rome, and Paulinus not being able to see him, this Saint writ him the Thirty seventh Letter to tell him that his Sins must needs have been the Cause of his being deprived of that Happiness; and there commends the Faith and Watch∣fulness of that Bishop: This Letter was written after Victricius's Journey into Italy, in the Year 404.

In the Thirty eighth to Aper, S. Paulinus exalts that Man's Conversion, exhorting him to rejoice rather than be sad, because the World hates and despises that sort of Life which he had embraced; charging him to serve God with the same Zeal that he had served the World. This Letter is supposed to be of the Year 404.

Aper and his Wife Amanda having declared to S. Paulinus, that they were obliged to take care of their Estate, because of the Lands belonging to their Children; he answereth them, that they ought to be perswaded that the Divine Providence had left them that Care for the Exercise of their Vertue. He saith further, that a man may advance towards Perfection by the Exercise of Country-Business, and learn to improve his Soul by the manner of tilling Ground. Here one may find an excellent Comparison of Agriculture, with the spiritual Life, and an ingenious Allegory upon those four kinds of Beasts that eat up the Fruits of the Earth, spoken of by the Prophet Joel, which he applies to passions of the Soul.

In the fortieth Letter S. Paulinus answereth very modestly to the Letter sent him by Sanctus and Amandus; he treateth there of the great need he had to bewail his Sins, and applies to this Subject what is in the Hundred and first Psalm, concerning the Pelican, the Owl, and the Sparrow.

The Forty first, to Sanctus, is a Treatise of Christian Watchfulness, upon the Parable of the Ten Virgins.

In the Forty second, to Florentius Bishop of Cahors, he thanketh this Bishop for the Honour he had done him in writing to him, assuring him of his Friendship; he commendeth him and desireth his Prayers. That Letter is full of Noble Expressions, to extol the Dignity and Merits of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ, saith he, is that Rock containing that Spring of living Water, which we happily find not far from us, when we are very thirsty in this World: This is it that refreshes us, and keeps us from being consumed by the Heat of Lust. This is the Rock upon which standeth that House that shall never fall. This is the Rock which having been opened at the Side cast out Water and Blood, to make us taste of two wholsome Fountains, the Water of Grace, and the Blood of the Sacrament, which proves at the same time both the Spring and the Price of our Salvation. These last Letters are of the year 405.

The Forty third is written to Desiderius, who desired an Exposition of the Benedictions of the Patriarchs; he answers him, that he is better able to expound them himself, than he, of whom he desireth the Exposition. He only gives by the bye, an Explication of the Parable of the Withered Fig-Tree. He sent this Letter in 406. by Victor, lately recovered of a long and dangerous sickness. He gave him likewise two Notes which he had written long before, with a Letter to Severus, not now extant. Desiderius his Request gave him Occasion to require

it of Rufinus, who gave him that Satisfaction. The Letters he writ upon that Subject are a∣mong Rufinus's Works, and among these the Forty sixth and Forty seventh, were written in 408.

In the Forty fourth he admires the Spirit of Onction and Piety which he finds in Aper's Letters. Then he commends the Vertues of his Wife, and wishes that her Children may be well brought up.

In the Forty fifth, to S. Augustin, S. Paulinus returns him Thanks for the Book that Quintus had given him at Rome, as from him. Afterwards he commends Melania, then in Affliction for the Loss of her only Son: Upon Occasion of whose Death, he discourseth of the Felicity which the Saints shall enjoy after the Resurrection. He observes that all their Employment shall be then to praise God everlastingly, and to give him continual Thanks. This Letter was put into the hands of Quintus an African Deacon, who came into Italy in the Year 408. S. Paulinus's Letter is of the 20th of May following, as he observes in the Body of the Letter.

The Forty eighth Letter is a Fragment of an Epistle, quoted by S. Gregory of Tours, in which S. Paulinus opposes to the Disorders and Impieties of the Age, the Sanctity and Reli∣gion of some Bishops, as of Exuperius of Tolouse, of Simplicius of Vienna, of Amandus of Bourdeaux, of Diogenianus of Albi, of Dynamius of Angoulesme, of Verecundus of Clermont, of Alethius of Cahors, and of Pegasius of Perigueux. Since those times there have been some Ages wherein the Manners of the Laity might have been opposed to the Disorders of Church-men.

The Forty ninth Letter to Macarius contains the History of a Pilot Catechumen, who hap∣pening to be alone in a Ship loaded with Corn, which a Storm had blown off of the Port of Sardinia, was saved Miraculously by S. Foelix the Martyr's Protection: and having been several days at Sea, at last came safe to Land upon the Coasts of Abruzzo. This Letter may be called S. Paulinus's Master-piece. It were difficult to make a more agreeable Description, and a more natural Draught, than this which he makes, of all the Circumstances of that Story. He con∣cludes from thence, that undoubtedly the Saints succour us in time of need. He was a Bishop when he writ it; and so it could not be before the Year 410.

In the fiftieth to S. Augustin, S. Paulinus proposes to him several Difficulties upon several places of the Scripture, to which S. Augustin answereth by the hundred and forty ninth, written in 414. since S. Paulinus's Letter was written some time before. The Date of the fifty first to Eucherius is not known; for he was yet in the Monastery of Lerins, out of which he did not withdraw till 426. It is a Letter of Christian Compliments, such as are all those of S. Paulinus.

There remains only the Passion of S. Genesius, Martyr of Arles, which bears S. Paulinus his Name, and is sufficiently like his Style, though some have doubted whether he was the Au∣thor of it.

After these Letters are thirty two pieces of Poetry; fifteen of them are concerning S. Foelix the Martyr, and the others upon different Subjects, upon which I need not inlarge.

We have not his Epitome, in Verse, of a Book of the History of the Kings, commended by Ausonius; nor his Panegyrick upon Theodosius the Emperor, spoken of in S. Jerom, ep. 13. in Cassiodorus l. 2. Instit. divin. in Gennadius and Trithemius, and mentioned by S. Paulinus in his twenty eighth Letter. We have lost likewise some of his Letters to his Friends, which are mentioned in those that we have, and all those which he writ to his Sister concerning the Contempt of the World, reckoned by Gennadius among this Father's Works. The same Author speaks likewise of a Treatise of Repentance, and of the Praise of Martyrs, which he affirms to be the chiefest of his Works, and an Office of the Sacrament. As to the Collection of Hymns mentioned likewise by him, that perhaps did not differ from the Hymns we have in honour of S. Foelix. S. Augustin witnesseth in the thirty first Letter, that S. Paulinus was writing something against Pagans. S. Gregory of Tours citeth a Letter, not now extant, which mentions the Relicks of S. Gervasius and S. Protasius. Lastly, S. Paulinus tells us in his forty sixth Epistle, that he had translated some of the Works of S. Clemens Romanus. It is likely, that while he was Bishop he made some Sermons, but whether they were not collected, or whether they have been lost, certain it is that we have none of them.

The Letter to Marcella is written in S. Paulinus's Style, but it doth not well agree with the History of that famous Widow; for the Author of that Letter writes to her as to a person newly converted: whereas it is certain that she was converted long before S. Paulinus. It may be that the Lady to whom it is directed was another of the same Name.

The Letter to Celancia, attributed likewise to S. Paulinus, is of a Style not very different from his, yet not altogether the same, and he turns the Scripture after another manner. It is certain∣ly of an ancient Author, who lived before Paganism was utterly destroyed, and after the Reign of Jovian.

The Poem, whereby the Author exhorts his Wife to consecrate her self to God, is more elegant and better written than those of S. Paulinus. It does not agree to him, because at the time when it was written, the West was all in a Confusion, that is, in the year 407. It was not necessary that he should exhort his Wife to be converted, and to lead a Christian Life, seeing she had lived so a long time. Four Manuscripts ascribe that Poem to Prosper.

The Poem, immediately following, is a Paraphrase upon what S. Bernard hath written in honour of the Name of Jesus, and so is far younger than S. Paulinus, though it seems to many to be ancient. It is not necessary to observe, that the Life of S. Ambrose is written by another Paulinus.

The six Books of S. Martin's Life, ascribed to S. Paulinus, cannot be his, because in the se∣cond he is cited as a third Person, and he that wrote them mentions Perpetuus, sixth Bishop of Tours after S. Martin, who was not ordained till towards the latter end of the fifth Century, long after the Death of S. Paulinus, Bishop of Nola. There is in the Rules of Benedictus A∣••••anensis an Answer to this Question; What ought to be the Monks Penance, which is attributed to Paulinus, but though it be Eloquent, yet it is not believed to have been written by the Bishop of Nola.

The Writings of S. Paulinus are composed with a great deal of Art and Elegance, his way of speaking is close and clear, his Terms are pure and choice, his Discourse sententious and lively: He excites the Attention of his Readers and keeps them awake. He passes insensibly from one thing to another, all hangs well together, one Sentence depending upon the other, and the end of one Thought is the beginning of the next. S. Jerom advised him, upon his Conversion, to learn the holy Scripture and to make use of it. He made great use of that Counsel; for after that he made it so familiar to him, that in all his Discourses he inserts a vast Number of Pas∣sages of Scripture, and adapts them to his Subject, by giving them often a Sence very different from their natural one. They are as so many precious Stones, set in, and so curiously wrought that they raise the Discourse and give it a new Lustre. Yet it must be confessed that he doth it too often, and that his Allusions and Allegories are sometimes too far fetch'd. He turns things agreeably and finely: His Letters are pleasant and cheerful, they move, and they divert, rather than instruct. It is hard to judge, saith S. Augustin, whether they have more Sweetness or Fire, more Fruitfulness or Light. They soften and give Heat at the same time, they strengthen and mollify. Yet it must be owned that his Notions are not always solid and exact; and often please because of a false Lustre. He often plays with Words, and uses several Childish Allego∣ries. He is excellent in his Draughts and Descriptions. He doth not penetrate into Dogmati∣cal Matters, nor carry points of Morality very far, but only points at them superficially. All his Writings are short, but they are many, and all carefully composed. Ausonius highly com∣mends his Poems, yet can they not pass for perfect in that kind, especially those which he made after his Conversion. He understood Greek but indifferently, and was very little conversant with History or the Sciences. He was esteemed, beloved, and caressed by all the great Men of that Age, of what party soever they were, and he kept Correspondency with them without falling out with any. We may say, with Cardinal Perron, that he was the Delight of his time. He led a retired and very frugal Life, yet without great Austerity. He was the Admiration of his own Age by Reason of his voluntary Poverty, and his Bestowing his great Estate upon the Poor.

He was very pious, and had a very tender Conscience. One finds in all his Letters the Chara∣cter of an humble, modest and meek Spirit, he was much affected with the Sense of his own Weak∣ness, and the Necessity of God's Help. He had much Devotion for the Saints, was inclinable to believe miraculous Stories, and to reverence Relicks.

The first Edition of this Author's Works was made at Paris by Badius in the year 1516. The second was printed at Colen, by the Care of Gravius. After that they were inserted into the Or∣thodoxographa, and the Bibliothecae Patrum. Rosweidus caused them to be printed at Antwerp in 1622. but at last there was an Edition of them in quarto at Paris. It is to be wished, that the Book∣sellers who printed it had taken as much care to have it upon good Paper and in a fair Character as he that took care of the Edition did to render it Correct and Useful. He hath divided it into two Volumes; in the former are the Letters and Poems, generally owned to belong to S. Pauli∣nus, which are set down separately according to the Order of Time. He hath revised and cor∣rected the Letters and the Poems by several Manuscripts. He hath added some new Letters, some he hath divided into two, and in some places he hath made one of two.

The second Volume contains the doubtful Works, Notes upon the Epistles and Poems that are in the first Volume; the Testimones both of Ancient and Modern Authors concerning S. Pau∣linus, with a new Account of this Saint's Life, very large, and taken out of his own Writings: Seven Dissertations, whereof the two first are to justify the Chronological Order, wherein he hath set the Letters and the Poems. The three following contain the Lives of Sulpicius Severus, A∣lethius, Victricius, and Aper, to whom S. Paulinus writ most of his Letters. The sixth is con∣cerning S. Paulinus his Works, which are either lost or dubious, or supposititious. The last con∣tains an Examination of the History of S. Paulinus his Captivity. After this comes a Catalogue of various Readings, and several very useful Tables. There is a French Translation of S. Paulinus, his Letters preparing, which will be useful and diverting.

PELAGIUS.

PELAGIUS, an English Monk, a 1.125 Rufinus's Disciple, Head of the Heresy called by his * 1.126 Name, hath his place amongst Ecclesiastical Authors, because of some Books that he hath written, of which we have spoken already. His Treatises are a Commentary upon S. Paul's E∣pistles b 1.127, attributed to S. Jerom c 1.128. The Letter to Demetrias d 1.129 and some others, in the last Volume of S. Jerom's Works. A Treatise concerning the power of Nature, refuted by S. Au∣gustin in the Book of Nature and of Grace. Several Books about Free-Will; part whereof S. Au∣gustin refuteth in the Book of the Grace of Jesus Christ; and a Confession of Faith, directed to Pope Innocent e 1.130 which is in S. Jerom, in S. Augustin, and in the second Volume of Councils of the last Edition, pag. 1563. This Author's Style is dry, flat, and barren. He was not learned, but he was a Man of good Sence: His Reflections are short and judicious.

COELESTIUS.

COELESTIUS, Pelagius his Country-man and Disciple a 1.131, was guilty of the same Errors; yea, he carried them farther, and maintained them with greater Boldness. He was * 1.132 of a subtil and cunning Temper b 1.133. He included his whole Doctrine in six propositions, which Hilary of Syracuse sent to S. Augustin, who refutes them in the Eighty ninth Epistle. They are related likewise by Marius Mercator; and were condemned in the Synod of Palaestine where, Pelagius himself was constrained to Anathematize them. S. Augustin published, and withal answered eight Definitions, or Reasonings of this Author. He presented a kind of Confession of Faith to Pope Zosimus, out of which S. Augustin produces some Fragments in the fifth, sixth, and twenty third Chapters of the second Book of Grace, and Original Sin.

NICEAS.

THE Account which Gennadius gives of this Author is this.

Niceas, Bishop of some Town in Romania, hath written after a plain and easy manner, six Books of Instructions * 1.134 for those that were preparing for Baptism. The First is concerning the Dispositions of Catechu∣mens, who desired to be baptized. The Second of the Errors of the Gentiles. He observes that in his time they put into the number of the Gods one Melchidius, a House-keeper, because of his Liberality; and one Gadarius, a Peasant, because of his Strength. The Third Book is of Faith in one only God. The Fourth is against Calculating of Nativities. The Fifth is concerning the Creed. The Sixth concerning the Victim of the Paschal Lamb. The same Author writ a Letter to a Virgin that was fallen into Sin. Which Discourse may serve for an Exhortation to all those that commit Sin. This Author lived about the beginning of the Fifth Century.

And this is all that, we know of him.

OLYMPIUS.

OLYMPIUS, a Bishop, and a Spaniard by Birth, hath written a Doctrinal Treatise against those that ascribe Sin to Nature, and not to Free-will: Where he shows, That not by Na∣ture, * 1.135 but by Disobedience, Evil was mingled with our Nature. This Bishop was present at the Council of Toledo in 405. S. Augustin commends him for a Man of great repute, in the First Book against Julianus, Chap. 3d. and 7th. and he quoteth his Writings in the 2d. Chapter of the same Work.

BACHIARIUS.

BACHIARIUS, a Christian Philosopher, saith Gennadius, who was desirous wholly to dis∣ingage himself from the World, and to fix his Thoughts entirely upon God; and there∣fore * 1.136 often changed his Habitation that he might be the less in love with any. It is said that he writ several small Books. I have read but One, concerning Faith, directed to the Bishop of Rome, wherein he applauds himself for his way of living; affirming, That it was not the fear of Men, that made him chuse a Pilgrim's life, but that he might imitate Abraham when he left his Country, and parted with his Kindred.

There is in the Bibliotheca Patrum a Letter of this Author's di∣rected to Bishop Januarius, written about a Monk, who had abused a Nun. The Bishop to whom he writes, would receive him no more, nor admit him to Penance: Bachiarius telleth him, that such Severity is contrary to the Scripture, and exhorteth the Monk to quit the Nun whom he had abused, and doe Penance. This is a learned Letter, and well written; there are many happy Applications of both the Ceremonies and the Histories of the Old Testament. Ivo Carnutensis, Epist. 64. mentions another Letter of this Author's upon Solomon's latter end.

SABBATIUS.

SABBATIUS, a Bishop in Gaul, at the request of a Virgin that was Consecrated to God, whose Name was Secunda, wrote a Book of Faith against Marcion, Valentinus, Aëtius, and * 1.137 Eunomius; wherein he demonstrates both by Reason and Testimonies of Holy Scripture, That there is but one only God who made Heaven and Earth out of nothing: He proves also that Jesus Christ was very Man, having had a real Body, subject to the same infirmities with our's, to the necessity of Eating and Drinking, to Weariness, Sorrow, Sufferings and Death. He oppo∣ses these Truths to the Errors of Marcion and Valentinus, who admitted two Principles, and affirmed that Jesus Christ had onely the Similitude of Flesh: He sheweth against Aëtius and Eunomius, That the Father and the Son are not two different Natures, nor two Divinities, but that they have but one and the same Essence; That the Son proceedeth from the Father, and yet is co-eternal with him. This is what Gennadius saith of this Author, whom he places among those who flourished in the beginning of the Fifth Century.

ISAAC.

THis ISAAC is mentioned by none but Gennadius: He ranks him among the Authors that lived in the beginning of the Fifth Century, and says, that he writ a Book of the Tri∣nity * 1.138 and the Incarnation; whose dark Reasonings and intricate Discourses show that he owned Three Persons in one and the same Divinity; yet so, as that each of them had something proper and peculiar, which the others had not: Viz. That it was peculiar to the Father to be without beginning, and to be the Original of the rest: That it was the Property of the Son to be begot∣ten, and yet neither created nor posterior to him that begot him: And Lastly, That the Property of the Holy Ghost was, that though he was neither created nor begotten, yet he proceeded from another: And, as to the Incarnation, he wrote so, as that it appeared that he owned two Na∣tures in one and the same Person. Sirmondus published this Book from a Manuscript in Pithaus's Library, which tells us that this Author had been a Jew; for this Treatise is intituled of Isaac's Faith, who had been a Jew. It contains those things whereof Gennadius hath made an Extract: There are very subtil Reasonings upon the Mysteries of the Trinity and of the Incarnation.

PAULUS OROSIUS.

PAULUS OROSIUS, a Spanish Priest of Tarracon, S. Augustin's Disciple, flourished under the Emperors Arcadius and Honorius. * 1.139

S. Augustin sent him into Palaestine in the Year 415, to desire S. Jerom's Opinion concerning the Original of the Soul: He brought from thence S. Steven's Relicks. The City of Rome having been taken in the Year 410, by Alaric, King of the Goths, the Heathens, willing to render the Christians odious, accused them of being the cause of that misfortune, and of all the other cala∣mities that oppressed the Roman Empire. To defend them against that reproach, Paulus Orosius, at S. Augustin's request, undertook to write the History of the greatest Events that occurred from Jesus Christ to his own Time, to show that great Calamities had happened from time to time in the World, and that the Roman Empire had never been so free as since the Nativity of Jesus Christ. This Work is intituled Hormesta in some Manuscripts, and is cited under that Name by some Au∣thors; the Original and Explication of which Title is very uncertain. It is a kind of Universal History, divided into Seven Books, which may be of some use. It is not ill written, but not exact. It has many faults against History and against Chronology. He had not read the Greek Historians, and easily credited whatsoever might help his Subject, without examining whether it was well attested or not.

This Author hath written besides a small Treatise, intituled, An Apology for Free-will against Pelagius, which was Printed with his History in the Colen Edition of the Year 1582. By a mi∣stake they inserted several Chapters of S. Augustin's Treatise of Nature and Grace, which were se∣parated by Andreas Schottus in his Edition of it, in the Bibliotheca Patrum.

There is also, among S. Augustin's Works, before the Treatise against the Priscillianists and Origenists, a Letter of Orosius to S. Augustin concerning these Hereticks.

Some, upon the credit of certain Manuscripts, ascribe to him a Commentary upon the Book of Canticles, which is amongst Origen's Works, and a Treatise of Illustrious Men; but this was because they put Orosius's Name for Honorius's.

S. Augustin in his 166th. Letter, saith, That Orosius had great liveliness of spirit, a wonderfull facility of speaking, and a servent zeal. Vigil ing••nio, promptus eloquio, flagrans studio. His Style is close, and his Language pure enough.

Orosius's History was Printed at Paris in 1506, by Petit. The Apology for Free-will was Printed by it self at Louvain in 1558. The best Edition of both these Works, is that of Colen, of the Year 1582. The latter is found in the Bibliotheca Patrum, and the former in the Collections of Hi∣storians.

LUCIANUS, AVITUS, EVODIUS, SEVERUS.

THese four Authors are to be joyned with Orosius, because they writ concerning a particular Circumstance of his Life, that related to the Relicks of S. Steven. * 1.140

The First is a Grecian Priest, one Lucianus, who writ an History of the finding of S. Steven's Re∣licks: His Book was Translated into Latin by Avitus, a Spanish Priest, Orosius's friend, the Second of those Authors we are now speaking of. The Third is Evodius, Bishop of Uzala, in Africa, One of the Five that writ to Innocent the First, the 95th. Letter in S. Augustin; he wrote a small Treatise concerning the Miracles of S. Steven's Relicks, which Orosius had brought into the West. He is likewise the Author of a small Treatise of Faith, or the Unity of the Trinity, against the Ma∣nichees, which is in the Eighth Volume of S. Augustin's Works, as Sirmondus proves upon the credit of MSS. S. Augustin mentions Evodius's Book, touching S. Steven's Miracles, in the 8th, Chapt. 1. 22. Of the City of God; and Sigebert placeth Evodius amongst the Ecclesiastical Wri∣ters.

The last Author here named, is one Severus, a Bishop of the Island Minorca, who wrote a Circular Letter of the Jew's Conversion in that Island; and of the Miracles wrought in that place, by S. Steven's Relicks, which Orosius left there.

Lucianus's Book and Avitus's Letter, are printed by Surius upon the Third day of August.

Both these Books, attributed to Evodius, are none of his, since they doe not bear his Name as the Author, but only because they are directed to him. Baronius published Severus's Letter from a MS. in the Vatican Library. These Relations are so incredible, that were they not au∣thorized by the Testimonies of S. Augustin and Gennadius, we should scarce give any credit to them. They are all at the end of the Seventh Volume of the new Edition of S. Augustin.

MARCELLUS MEMORIALIS.

THis Author wrote the Acts of the Conference held at Carthage, betwixt the Catholicks and the Donatists, in the Year 1411. Part of them were printed by Papirius Massonus, and printed * 1.141 with Optatus, and in the last Collection of the Councils; but Baluzius printed them more ex∣actly in his new Collection of Councils.

EUSEBIUS.

THis Eusebius is not much known. Gennadius doth not tell us whence he was, nor what he was; but only observes, that he writ a Treatise of the Mystery of the Cross, and of the Con∣stancy * 1.142 which the Apostles, and particularly S. Peter, had, by virtue of the Cross. He places this Author among those that flourished in the beginning of the Fifth Century.

URSINUS.

URSINUS the Monk wrote a Treatise against those who affirm, That Hereticks are to be re-baptized; wherein he teacheth, That those ought not to be baptized again, who were bapti∣zed * 1.143 in the Name of Jesus Christ, or the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost; though they that baptized them were in an error, because it is enough to have been baptized either in the Name of Christ, or in the Name of the Trinity, to give a right to receive the Imposition of hands from the Bishop. This Treatise is among S. Cyprian's Works; I am apt to believe that the Author of it is more ancient, than to agree to this place.

MACARIUS.

GEnnadius mentions one Macarius a Monk, who writ a Treatise against Astrologers in Rome; Wherein, saith he, he sought the help of the Scripture by the labours of those of the East. This * 1.144 Macarius is he, probably, to whom Rufinus addresses his Apology, and his Translation of the Books of Origen's Principles; of whom S. Jerom saith in his Second Apology: Had you not returned from the East, this able Man would yet have been among the Astrologers. His Book is not extant.

HELIODORUS.

HELIODORUS, a Priest of Antioch, wrote an excellent Book of Virginity, grounded upon Scripture-testimonies. Gennadius, Chap. 29. * 1.145

PAULUS.

PAULUS, a Bishop (saith the same Gennadius, Chap. 31.) wrote a small Treatise of Re∣pentance; wherein he maintains, That Sinners are not so to afflict themselves for their Sins, * 1.146 as to fall into despair.

HELVIDIUS and VIGILANTIUS.

HEre are two Hereticks refuted by S. Jerom, reckoned by Gennadius amongst the Ecclesiasti∣cal Writers. Helvidius, saith he, Chap. 32. Auxentius his Disciple, an imitator of Symma∣chus, * 1.147 writ a Book that shows some Zeal for Religion, but an indiscreet one: His Style and Argu∣ments are very intricate. He cites several passages of Scripture, whence he concludes, That the Virgin Mary having brought forth Jesus Christ, had other Children by Joseph, that were called the Lord's brethren. S. Jerom confuted that Error, and writ a Treatise full of Testimonies out of the Scriptures against this Author.

Vigilantius, a Priest, Originally of Gaul, a Parish-priest, in the Diocess of Barcelona in Spain, hath written likewise some Treatises, whereby he shows his Zeal for Religion; but he was de∣ceived with Ambition, and an Opinion of himself, because he had a fine Style. Not being well versed in the Scriptures, he made a very bad Exposition of Daniel's Visions, publishing several impertinent things, wherefore he is numbred amongst Hereticks. S. Jerom answered him like∣wise.

St. AUGUSTIN.

ST. AUGUSTIN was born at Tagasta, a City of Numidia, in the Reign of Constantius, the 13th. of November, in the Year 354. which had for Consuls the Emperour himself the * 1.148 Seventh time, and Gallus Caesar the Third. St. Augustin's Father, an ordinary Citizen of that Town, was called Patricius; and his Mother, a very vertuous Woman, was named Monica. This holy Woman took care to instill into her Son the Principles of the Christian Religion, and placed him among the Catechumens: so that falling dangerously sick, he earnestly desired to be Baptized; but the violence of the Distemper abating, it was put off to another time. His Father being yet Unbaptized, and wanting that Sense of Religion that his Mother had, inten∣ded only to promote his Son in the World; and though he was not very Rich, yet he spared nothing to instruct and give him Learning: He made him learn the Rudiments of Gram∣mar at Tagasta; and then sent him to Madaura, to study Humanity-Learning. This Child had no mind to Study, and particularly hated the Greek Tongue; but his love for the Poets, made him first take a pleasure in it. At Sixteen Years of Age, having gone through his Hu∣manity-Course, his Father took him from Madaura, and sent him to Carthage to learn Rhe∣torick; but wanting a Fond for this necessary Expence for some time, St. Augustin tarried a whole Year at Tagasta; where Idleness disordered him. He went away at the latter end of the Year 371. for Carthage, where he applied himself to study Rhetorick, with much Application and Success. In the mean while his Father died, quickly after he was baptized. The reading of Cicero's Hortensius, inspir'd St. Augustin with a love of Wisdom: But not finding there the Name of Jesus Christ, which he had printed in his Heart from his Infancy, he betook himself to the reading of the Holy Scripture: But meeting not there with the flowers of profane Eloquence, he could not relish it, and so suffered himself to be led away by the Manichees. Being Nine∣teen Years old, he returned to Tagasta; where he taught Grammar, and frequented the Barr. This Exercise having fitted him for some noble Employment, he went to Carthage, at the Age of Twenty five, about the latter end of the Year 379. where he taught Rhetorick with Applause. He was still engaged in the Manichaean Errors; but he began to be better informed, by a Conference which he had with Faustus, about the Year 383. The Insolence of the Carthaginian Scholars, made him resolve to go to Rome, though against his Mother's Will, who desired either to keep him there, or to go with him. Being come to Rome, he fell sick in the House of a Manichee where he lodged: Being recover'd, he got some Scholars about him; but finding that most part of them were so base, to go away without Paying, he sought to settle somewhere else. The Inhabitants of Milan having sent to Symmachus, the Praefect of the City, desiring that he would find a Rhetorick-Professor for them, St. Augustin pro∣cured himself to be Chosen for that Employment. Being in Milan, he was so wrought upon by St. Ambrose's Discourses, that he resolved to be converted, and quit the Sect of the Manichees: He discovered this Design to his Mother, who came to him to Milan. Plato's Books con∣firm'd him in his Resolution. His Conversation with Simplicianus and Petilian did much fur∣ther his Conversion; and the reading of St. Paul's Epistles brought this great Work to Per∣fection, in the 32d. year of his Age. Before the Vacation, in the year 386. he stay'd only a few Days, to make an end of his Publick Lectures, which he was to read before the Vaca∣tion: Which no sooner came, but he withdrew to Verecundus his House; where he betook himself seriously to studying of the Truth, and to fit himself for Baptism; which he received at Easter, in the year 387. having utterly renounced his Profession. Afterwards, he resolved to return into his own Countrey; and having tarried some time at Rome; he embark'd at Ostia, where his Mother died. However, he continued his Voyage, and arrived in Africa towards the end of the year 388. He went through Carthage, where he lodged in a Magistrate's House, named Innocent; who was miraculously cured, as he gives the Account, in the 8th. Chap. of the 22d. Book of The City of God. He went to dwell at Tagasta,; where he abode three years, living in common with some of his Friends, exercising himself by Fastings, Prayers, and other Works of Piety, and applying himself Day and Night to the Meditation of the Law of God. The Fame of his Piety was so great, that as all that designed to embrace Spiritual Life, addressed themselves to him: Among the rest, a Person of Quality in Hippo, who was willing to give up himself to God, desired to entertain him, and to bring him to that Town. St. Augustin did not find himself disposed to follow his Advice: yet God did not permit his Journey to prove in vain; for Valerius, Bishop of Hippo, having proposed to the People to chuse a Priest whom that Church stood in need of, he chose St. Augustin, when he did not think of it; and he Ordained him, against his Will, about the beginning of the year 391. St. Augustin immediately retir'd to prepare himself for the worthy discharging of the Sacerdotal Function, and begg'd of Valerius time till Easter: In which space, he established a Monastery, or Community of Persons that had all things Common, renouncing the Property of any thing. Valerius, who designed that St. Augustin should preach in his room, permitted him to do it in his Presence, contrary to the Custom of the African Churches. This did not please some of

his Brethren; but he excus'd it, by the Usage of the Eastern Churches, and the need he had that some body should preach the Word of God in his place; because he being a Greek, could not do it so well in Latin. This Custom was found so reasonable, that several Bishops in Africa followed his Example; admitting Priests to Preach in their Presence: yea they did St. Augustin the Honour, to make him Speak in a General Council of Africa, held at Carthage, in the year 393. where he Expounded the Creed, in the Presence of the Bishops; who con∣ceived so great an Esteem of his Learning, that they judged him worthy of a more excellent Dignity. But Valerius fearing lest a Person so necessary for the Government of his Diocess, should be taken away from him, resolved to make him his Co-adjutor; and accordingly, two years after, he caused him to be Ordained Bishop of Hippo, by Megalius, Bishop of Calama, then Primate of Numidia, in the year 395. With much difficulty St. Augustin consented to that Ordination, though he did not then know, as he afterwards declar'd, that it was contrary to the Laws of the Church, and to a Canon of the Council of Nice, which forbids the Cr∣daining Two Bishops in the same Church. I shall not now give any Account of what he did and wrote whil'st he was Bishop, because that will come in, in the Abridgment of his Works: Neither will I enlarge upon the Praises which may be given him, nor upon his Holiness and his Vertues, which were known and admir'd by all the World, both before and after his Death. This is no part of my Design; besides, the Name only of St. Augustin, is the greatest Com∣mendation that can be given him; and whatsoever may be said after that, can serve only to lessen the Opinion Men have conceived of his rare Merit, and his great Piety. He died as Holily as he had liv'd, the 28th. day of August, 430. aged Seventy six Years, with Grief to see his Countrey Invaded by the Vandals; and the City, whereof he was Bishop, Besieged for several Months.

St. Augustin's Works make up several Volumes, wherein they are divided according to that order which was judged to be most natural. We shall follow that which is observed in the last Edition, set forth by the Benedictines of St. Germans.

The First TOME of St. Augustin's Works.

THE First Volume containeth the Works which he wrote before he was a Priest; with his Retractations and Confessions: which serve as Prefaces to his Works; because the First giveth * 1.149 an Account of his Writings, and is useful to understand the most difficult places of his Works; and the Second discovers his Genius, and takes notice of the principal Circumstances of his Life.

The Book of Retractations, is a Critical Review of his Works. He tells you there the Title, and sets down the first Words of them: He gives a Catalogue according to the Time, and he observes upon what Occasion, and wherefore he writ them: he tells the Subject and the De∣sign which he had in composing them: he clears those places which seem to be obscure: he softens those which he thinks are too hard, gives a good Sence to such as seem capable of having a bad one, and rectifies them where he thinks that he erred from the Truth. In one word; He confesseth ingenuously the Errours or Mistakes which he committed. The Preface to this Work is very humble: He says, That his Design is, to review his Works with the Severity of a Censor, and to reprove his own Faults himself; following therein the Apostle's Advice, who saith, That if we judge our selves, we should not be judged of the Lord. That he is frighted with those words of the Wise-man, That it is difficult to avoid committing Faults in much speaking. That he is not terrify'd with the great number of his Writings; since none can be said to Write or Speak too much, when he Speaks and Writes only things that are necessary: but he is afraid, lest there should be in his Writings many false things, or at least, unprofitable ones. That if now being Old, he thinketh not himself free from Errour, it is impossible but that he must have committed Faults when he was Young, either in Speaking or in Writing; and so much the rather, because he was then obliged to Speak often. That therefore he is resolved to judge him∣self, according to the Rules of Jesus Christ, his Master, whose Judgments he desires to avoid.

The Body of this Work is divided into Two Books. In the former, he reviseth the Works which he writ before he was Bishop: And in the latter, he speaketh of those which he com∣posed afterwards, to the Year 427. which is the time when he made his Book of Retractations. I need say no more at present, because in discoursing of each of them, I shall mention what St. Augustin hath observed in his Retractations.

His Confessions are an excellent Picture of his Life; he draweth himself with lively and natu∣ral Shapes, representing his Infancy, his Youth, and Conversion, very critically. He discovers both his Vices, and his Vertues, shewing plainly the inward Bent of his Heart; with the seve∣ral Motions wherewith he was agitated: As he speaks to God, so he often lifts up his Spirit to∣wards him, and intermixes his Narration with Prayers, Instructions, and Reflections. He tells us himself, That he would have us view him in that Book, as in a Looking-Glass that represents him to the Life; and that his Design in the Writing of it, was to Praise both the Justice, and the Mercy of God, with Respect to the Good and Evil which he had done, and to lift up his Heart, and Spirit to God. That this is the Effect that it produced in him when he composed it, and

that which it produceth now, when he readeth it. Others (saith he) may have what Opinion of it they please; but I know that several Pious Persons have loved my Confessions very much, and do * 1.150 love them still. As indeed, all spiritual Persons have ever since read that Work with Delight and Admiration. This Book is not full of whimsical Imaginations, and, empty, obscure use∣less Spiritualities, as most Works of this Nature are: It contains, on the contrary, excellent Prayers; sublime Notions of the Greatness, Wisdom, Goodness, and Providence of God; solid Reflections upon the Vanity, Weakness, and Corruption of Man; proper Remedies for his Misery, and Darkness; and most useful Instructions to further him in a spiritual Life. In one word, It may be said, that of all spiritual Books, there is none more sublime or stronger than this. Yet there are some Notions too Metaphysical, above the reach of some devout Men; and there appeareth too great an Affectation of Eloquence: There is, perhaps, too much Wit; and Heat, and not enough of Meekness, and Simplicity.

St. Augustin's Confessions are divided into Thirteen Books; whereof the Ten first treat of his Actions, and the Three last contain Reflections upon the beginning of Genesis. In the First Book, after an excellent Prayer to God, he describeth his Infancy, discovering the Sins he committed at that time, as well as the evil Inclinations that were in him. He represents, with all the beauty, and exactness imaginable, the things that are incident to Children; their Moti∣ons of Joy, and Sorrow, their Jealousie before they can speak, how hardly they learn to speak; their aversion to Study, their love of Play, and the fear of Chastisement. He charges himself with loving the Study of Fables, and Poetical Fictions; and hating the Principles of Gram∣mar, and particularly the Greek Tongue, tho' these Things were infinitely more profitable, than those Fables, whereof he discovers the danger. He says, That being fallen dangerously Sick, he desired to be Baptized; but coming to have some Ease, they deferred it, fearing he might defile himself again with new Crimes: Because (saith he) the Sins committed after Baptism, are greater, and more dangerous, than such as are committed before.

In the Second, he begins to describe the Disorders of his Youth; he says, That being returned to his Father's House at Sixteen years of Age, he gave himself to debauchery, notwithstanding his Mother's Admonitions; That he was guilty of Theft, by robbing an Apple-tree in a Neigh∣bour's Orchard with his Companions, with several Reflections upon the Motives that put him upon that Action.

In the Third he confesseth, That at Carthage, whither he was gone to finish his Studies; he was transported with the fire of Lust. He laments the love which he had for Stage-Plays and Publick Shows, and the Pleasure he found when they affected him at any time with Passion. He declares afterwards, That he read one of Cicero's Books, Entituled Hortensius, that inspired him with the love of Wisdom; but not finding in that Book the Name of Jesus Christ, which remained engraven in his Heart, and which he had as it were suck'd in with his Milk, he applied himself to the Holy Scripture; but that having read it with a Spirit of Pride, he relished it not, because of the plainness of it's Stile; and then he hearkened to the Dreams of the Manichees, who promised to bring him to the Knowledge of the Truth. He re••utes their Errors, and speaks with great tenderness of the Prayers which his Mother made, and the Tears that she shed for his Conversion.

He continued however Nine years in that Heresie, being deceived, and endeavouring to deceive others. He taught Rhetorick at Tagasta. There he lost one of his intimate Friends, whose Death grieved him exceedingly; whereof he describeth the Excess in the Fourth Book, where he says many fine Things concerning true and counterfeit Friendship. There he mentions the Treatise of Comeliness and Beauty, which he made at Twenty five years of Age; and gives an Account how easily he came to understand Aristotle's Categories. And he shews the Unprofita∣bleness of Learning.

In the Fifth he describes the degrees by which he came to be delivered from the Manichaean Here∣sie, how he discovered Faustus his Ignorance who was the Head of that Heresie. He adds, That having taught Rhetorick at Carthage, he went to Rome with a design to follow there the same Profession; but having been disheartened by the unhandsom usage of the Scholars, who refused to pay their Masters, he obtain'd of Symmachus the place of Rhetorick-Professor at Milan, where he heard St. Ambrose Preach, who perfectly disabused him of the Errors of the Manichees, and made him resolve absolutely to quit that Sect, and become a Catechumen.

He goeth on in the Sixth Book, to describe the Progress of his Conversion; which was much furthered by the Prayers and Admonitions of his Mother S. Monica, who came to find him at Milan, and contracted a strict Friendship with St. Ambrose. He observes, That this Holy Bi∣shop kept her from carrying Meat to the Graves of the Martyrs, as she used to do in her own Country. He describeth the Manners of two of his good Friends, Alypius and Nebridius, and the Agitations that were caused in himself by the knowledge of his Miseries, and the design which he had to alter his course of Life.

In the Seventh Book, he declares his Condition in the 31st year of his Age, how much he was yet in the dark as to the Nature of God, and the Spring of Evil: how he was perfectly weaned from Judicial Astrology, by hearing of the History of two Children that were born at the same moment of time, whose lot proved quite different: And lastly, by what degrees he rid himself of his Prejudices, and came to the knowledge of God, though he had not as yet those thoughts of Jesus Christ, which he ought to have had.

He declares, That he found the Divinity of the Word in the Books of the Platonists, but not his Incarnation: And afterwards comparing the Books of those Philosophers with the Books of the Holy Scripture, which he began to read, he observeth that the former had made him more knowing, but also more presumptuous. Whereas the others instructed him in true Humility, and in the way which Men ought to follow to obtain Salvation.

At last he comes in the Eighth Book to the best Passage of his Life, to that which happened in the Two and thirtieth year of his Age, which was his Conversion. First of all he was wrought upon by a Conference which he had with a holy Old Man, Simplicianus, who related to him the Conversion of a famous Rhetorick-Professor named Victorinus. He was further moved by the Story which Po••itiunus told him of another Conversion. And at last feeling himself agitated, and distracted, by several contrary thoughts, he withdrew into a Garden, where he heard a Voice from Heaven, commanding him, to open St. Paul's Epistles; whereof he had no sooner read some Lines, but he found himself wholly converted, and freed from the Agitations which till then had troubled him: Nothing can be more noble than the Description which he makes in that Book, of the Combats and Agitations which that man feels that is engaged in Vice, and hath formed a design of being converted to God.

St. Augustin was no sooner converted, but he resolved to leave his Profession. The Vacation being come, he retired to the Country-House of one of his Friends called Verecundus, to prepare himself for Baptism, which he received at Easter with Alypius, and his Son Adeodatus, whom he had by a Concubine. This he relateth in the Ninth Book, where he discourseth again of the Death of Verecundus, and Nebridius, and Adeodatus, which happened shortly after his Baptism; He speaketh likewise, of the Original of the Singing in the Church of Milan, that was established by St. Ambrose, when he was persecuted by Justina an Arian Princess; concerning the discovering of the Bodies of the Martyrs, St. Gervasius and St. Protasius, and of the Miracles done at the time of their Translation; of the discourse he had with his Mother S. Monica, about the Felicities of the other Life, and of the Death of that holy Widow which happened at Ostia, when he was re∣turning into Africa; of her Burial; of the Prayers that were made for her; and of the Sacrifice which was offered. He concludes this Book by recommending her to the Prayers of those that shall read his Confessions.

Having set forth in the foregoing Books what he was before his Conversion, he sheweth in the Tenth what he was at the time of his writing. He finds that his Conscience gave an unquestio∣nable Testimony of his love to God. He explains the Reasons that oblige Men to love God, reckoning up all the Faculties of his Soul that can lead him to know God, especially Memory, whereof he makes a wonderful Description: He says, amongst other things, that it serves to teach us many things, which entred not into the Mind by the Senses, and that it may lift us up to God. He occasionally speaks of Happiness, and of the Idea that Men have of God; afterwards he examineth himself about the three main Passions of Man, the love of Pleasures, of Know∣ledge, and of Glory. He sincerely confesseth what was his disposition with respect to these Passions, prescribing at the same time excellent Rules, to keep our selves from them. Lastly, He discovers the knowledge of the true Mediatour, and of the Graces which he merited for us.

The Three last Books are about less sensible Matters: He waves the History of his Life to speak of the love which he had for the Sacred Books, and of the Knowledge that God had given him of them; which to show, he undertakes to explain the beginning of Genesis, upon which occasion he starts several very subtil Questions.

In the Eleventh, he refuteth those that asked, what God was doing before he created the World, and how God on a sudden formed the design of creating any thing; whereupon he enters into a long Discourse concerning the Nature of Time.

In the Twelfth Book he treateth of the first Matter. He pretends that by the Heavens and the Earth, which God is said to have created in the beginning, we are to understand spiritual Substances, and the shapeless Matter of corporeal things; that the Scripture speaking of the Crea∣tion of these two sorts of Beings, makes no mention of days; because there is no time with re∣spect to them. He affirms, That whatsoever he hath said concerning the World's Creation cannot be denied, though the beginning of Genesis were otherwise expounded, because these are undoubted Truths. He treateth here of the different Explications which may be made of the Holy Scripture, affirming, That there is sufficient reason to believe, that the Canonical Authors foresaw all the Truths that might be drawn from their words, and though they had not foreseen these Truths, yet the Holy Ghost foresaw them: Whence he seems to conclude, that we are not to reject any sence that may be given to the holy Scripture, provided it is conformable to the Truth.

At last, having admired the Goodness of God, who standing in no need of the Creatures, had given them not only a Being, but also all the Perfections of that Being; he discovereth in the last Book the Mystery of the Trinity in the first words of Genesis, and even the Personal Property of the Holy Ghost; which gives him an admirable opportunity of describing the Actions of Cha∣rity in our selves. He concludes with a curious Allegory upon the beginning of Genesis, and finds in the Creation the System and Oeconomy of whatsoever God hath done for the Establish∣ment of his Church, and the Sanctification of Men; the only end which he proposed to himself in all his Works.

St. Augustin placeth the Books of Confessions before those against Faustus, which were writ∣ten about the Year 400, in his Retractations, from whence we may conclude, that these were both written about the same time.

After these two, which serve, as we have said, for a Preface to all St. Augustin's Works, you find in this first Volume, the Books that St. Augustin writ in his Youth, before he was a Priest, in the same order in which they were written.

The three Books against the Academici, are the first after the Treatise of Beauty and Comeliness, which is lost. He composed them in the Year 386, in his solitude, when he prepared himself for Baptism. They are written in imitation of Cicero, in the form of a Dialogue, and directed to Romanianus his Countryman, whom he adviseth to Study Philosophy. The dispute beginneth betwixt Licentius Son to Romanianus, and Trygetius; after them Alypius and St. Augustin begin to speak.

Having observed in the first Book, that the good things of Fortune do not render men happy, he exhorts Romanianus to the Study of Wisdom, whose sweetness he then tasted. He afterwards gives an Account of three Conferences which Licentius and Trygetius had had about Happiness. Licentius held with the Academici, That to be happy it was enough to seek after the Truth; but Trygetius pretended, That it was necessary to know it perfectly; both being agreed, That Wis∣dom is that which makes Men happy, they begin to dispute about the definition of Wisdom. Trygetius gives several, all disapproved by Licentius, who asserts, That Wisdom consisted not only in Knowledge, but also in the pursuit of the Truth: whereupon St. Augustin concludes, That since we cannot be happy without knowing and enquiring after the Truth, our only appli∣cation should be to seek for it.

In the Second Book, having again exhorted Romanianus to the Study of Philosophy, he sets down three other Conferences, wherein Alypius produces the several Opinions of both the An∣cient and Modern Academicks. And because the latter said, That some things were probable, though the Truth was not known, they laughed at that Opinion, it being impossible, say they, to know whether a thing is like the Truth, without knowing the Truth it self. And this very thing obligeth Men to enquire the more carefully after likely and probable things, according to the Principles of the Academicks.

The Third Book begins with Reflections upon Fortune. St. Augustin shews, That the Goods of Fortune are of no use to get Wisdom: and that the Wise Man ought at least to know Wis∣dom, refuting withall, the Principles both of Cicero, and of the other Academicks, who affirmed; That we know nothing, and that nothing ought to be asserted. He blames the damnable Maxim of those who permitted Men to follow every thing that seemed probable, without being certain of any thing. He shews the dangerous Consequences of such Principles, and endeavours to prove that neither the ancient Academicks, nor Cicero himself, were of that Opinion.

These three Books are written with all imaginable Elegance and Purity: The Method and Reasonings are just: The Matter treated of is well cleared and made intelligible for all Men; it is beautified with agreeable Suppositions and pleasant Stories. It may be said, That these Dia∣logues are not much inferior to Tully's for stile, but much above them for the exactness and soli∣dity of the Arguments and Notions. In his Retractations he findeth fault with several places in them, which seemed not to him sufficiently to savour of Christianity, but might be born with in a Philosophical Work.

The Book of a Happy Life, or, of Felicity, is a Work of the same Nature, written by St. Au∣gustin at the same time, in the 33d. year of his Age. It is dedicated to Manlius Theodorus, whom he had known at Milan. In the beginning he makes a distinction of three sorts of Persons. Some to avoid the Troubles of this Life, fly into Harbour as soon as they come to the use of Rea∣son, that they may live quietly. Others on the contrary, having been a while ingaged in the Storms of this Life, carried away with Passions, Pleasures, or Glory, find themselves happily driven into Harbour by some Storm. The third sort are they, who in the midst of Storms and Tempests, have always had an eye to some Star, with a design to return into Harbour. The most dangerous Rock to be feared in this Navigation, is that of Vain-Glory, which we meet with at the first setting out, and where it is difficult to avoid Shipwrack. These Reflections St. Augustin applies to himself, and saith, That at Twenty five Years of Age, having conceived a strong Passion for Philosophy, by reading of Tully's Hortensius, he resolved to give up himself to that Study: but that having been some time wrap'd up with the dark Clouds of the Errors of the Manichees, which hid from him the Star that should have guided him: At last that mist was dissipated. That the Academicks had long detain'd him in the midst of the Sea, in a continual Agitation; but he had now discover'd a lucky Star that shewed him the Truth, by the Discourses, both of St. Ambrose, and Theodorus, to whom he writeth, That the love both of Pleasure, and of Glory, had for sometime detain'd him; but, in the end, he weighed all his Anchors to come into Port.

After this fair beginning, he acquaints Theodorus with a Discourse, which he supposeth to be held upon the 15th of November, his Birth-day, with his Mother, his Brother, his Son, his Cousins, and his Two Disciples, Trygetius and Licentius, who appeared already in the foregoing Dia∣logues. That they might enter upon the Matter the sooner, St. Augustin introduces them agreed in this Point, That Man being made up of Body, and Soul, the Soul is to be fed as well as the Body, because it hath equal need of Nourishment. After this he propounds the subject of

their Conference, saying, That since all Men desire to be happy, it is certain, that all that want what they would have, are not happy; but he asketh, Whether they be happy that have what they desire? St. Austin's Mother having answered, That they are happy, if that which they desire be good, Si bona, inquit, velit & habeat, beatus est: He replies immediately, That she had found out the greatest Secret in Philosophy; Ipsam prorsus, mater, arcem Philoso∣phiae tenuisti. Upon these Principles, he shews, in the Three Dialogues of this Book, That true Felicity consists in the Knowledge of God: For, in the first place, the Goods of Fortune cannot make us happy, since we cannot have them when we would. The Academicks cannot be happy in their enquiry after Truth, since they have not what they would find; but they that seek God are happy, because they no sooner seek to him, but he begins to shew them Mer∣cy. All those whose Souls want any thing, are not happy: None but God can fill the Soul; therefore none but God can make us happy: None is happy without Wisdom; And can Wis∣dom be had without God? Is there any other Wisdom than that which cometh from him? Is he not VVisdom and Truth?

He concludes with Exhorting those to whom he speaks, to seek after God, that they may come to the perfect Knowledge of him, wherein consists the Soveraign Felicity of Life, and the true Happiness of the Soul. He corrects this Passage in his Retractations, observing that Man cannot be entirely and perfectly happy in this Life; because he cannot know God perfectly, till he comes to the other VVorld.

St. Austin treateth of Providence in his Two Books of Order: Shewing, That all good, and evil Things come to pass, according to the Order of divine Providence. These Books are writ∣ten Dialogue wise: In the First, he discourses of Providence in general; in the Second, he be∣gins to enquire, What Order is; but immediately digresses to speak of the Love of Glory: And his Mother coming in, he puts an end to the Conference; shewing, That Women should not be forbidden to Study VVisdom.

In the Third Dialogue, which begins the Second Book, St. Augustin clears several particular Difficulties, about the Order of Providence. He enquires what it is to be with God, and in God's Order; in what Sence a wise Man may be said to abide with God, and to be immoveable: He maintains, That foolish, and wicked Actions come into the Order of Providence, because they have their Use for the good of the Universe, and manifest God's Justice.

In the Fourth Dialogue he proves, That God was always Just, tho' there was no occasion for the exercise of his Justice before there were wicked Men: That Evil was introduced against God's Order; but that the Justice of God submitted it to its Orders. Having bandied these Metaphysical Questions, he enters upon Morals; exhorting his Disciples to follow God's Or∣der, both in their Behaviour, and in their Studies. He says, Men ought to live after the fol∣lowing Pattern.

'Tis necessary (saith he) for young Men to avoid Debauches, and Excess; to despise gay Cloths, and rich Attire; to be careful not to lose their time, either at Play, or unprofitable Recreations; not to be Idle, or Sleepy; to be free from Jealousie, Envy, and Ambition; in one word, not to suffer themselves to be transported by any violent Passion: They should be perswaded, That love of Riches, is the worst Poyson that can infect their Hearts. They ought to do nothing, either with Cowardice, or with Rashness. If they are offended, let them refrain their Anger. They ought to correct all Vices, but to hate no Bo∣dy; not to be too severe, or too yielding. Let their Reproofs be always for a good End; and their Meekness never Authorize Vice: Let them look upon all that are committed to their Charge, as their own: Let them serve others without Affectation of Dominion; and when they become Masters, let them still be willing to serve: Let them carefully avoid making Enemies; and if they have any, let them bear with them patiently, and endeavour to be quickly reconciled: In all their Business with others, and their whole Behaviour; let them ob∣serve that Maxim of the Law of Nature: Do not that to others, which you would not have done to you. Let them not meddle with Publick Affairs, except they are very capable▪ and study to get Friends in what Employment soever they be; take a delight in serving those that deserve it, even when they least look for it: Let them live orderly, honour God, think of him and seek him by Faith, Hope, and Charity.

Having thus given Precepts for the Manners of Youth, he prescribeth Rules for their Stu∣dies. He saith, That Learning is got by Authority and Reason; and, That there is a Two∣fold Authority, that of God, and that of Men. These may deceive us; but God never affir∣meth any thing but what is True. He treateth afterwards of Reason; and having given a Definition of it, he shews, That all Learning is nothing but Reason occupied in the considera∣tion of different Objects. He draws up a Catalogue of all the Sciences, and gives a short Ac∣count, both of the object and use of each of them: From thence he passes to the Knowledge of the Soul, and of God; wherein he places true Wisdom, and concludes his Discourse with an Exhortation to Vertue.

His Two Books of Soliloquies, were likewise written by S. Augustin in his Retirement, about the beginning of the Year 387. His Design is to grow more perfect in the Knowledge, both of God and his own Soul. To this end, after an excellent Prayer to God, he examines his Reason, and makes it return Answers. In the first Book he treateth, particularly, of the necessary Dispositions in the Soul, to deserve the Knowledge of God. He teaches, That it arrives to that Knowledge by Faith, Hope, and Charity, and by turning away the Heart, and Thoughts from

Earthly Things, to seek and love nothing but God. At the latter end, he falls upon the Que∣stion of the Immortality of the Soul▪ which he prosecutes in the Second Book. He concludes, That the Soul is Immortal, because it is the Habitation of Truth, which is Eternal: Which puts him upon making several Reflections, both upon Truth and Falshood. This lact Volume is not compleat, as S. Augustin himself observes in his Retractations; where he corrects some faulty Expressions that he used at a time when he was not throughly instructed in Religion.

Sometime after the Books of Soliloquies, St. Augustin being returned to Milan▪ writ the Book Of the Immortality of the Soul: Which is (saith he in his Retractations) as a Memorial which I made to compleat my Soliloquies, that were imperfect: But I know not how it came to be Publick against my Will; so that it is now amongst my Works. This Book (addeth he) is so dark in the be∣ginning, both by reason of the Expressions, and the brevity of the Reasonings, that it wear••eth the Reader; and requires so great an Attention, that I can scarce understand it my self with much Ap∣plication. The reading of it will discover, that it is rather Memoirs, than a finish'd Work. He has Collected several, dry, barren Arguments, to prove the Immortality of the Soul.

These are some of his Principles. Knowledge is Eternal; wherefore the Soul, which is the Seat of Knowledge, is Immortal. Reason, and the Soul, are all one; but Reason is Immuta∣ble and Eternal. Matter cannot be annihilated, let it be divided never so much; yet it abideth. And, Who can believe the Soul to be in a worse Condition? Nothing can create it self, and no∣thing can annihilate it self. Life is the Essence of the Soul; therefore it cannot be deprived of it. The Soul is not the Disposition of the Parts of the Body; seeing the more we endeavour to abstract it from Sense, the more easily we comprehend Things: Neither can it be chan∣ged into a Body; for were this Change possible, it must be either because the Soul is willing, or because it may be forced to it by the Body; but both these Notions are equally absurd. These are the Principles, whereupon St. Austin enlargeth in this Treatise, and which he applies to his purpose with great subtilty, and fineness. This Book is a convincing Evidence of his Skill in Logick.

The following Treatise is Intituled, Of the Quantity of the Soul: It is placed here, because it treateth of the same Matter with the foregoing; for, according to the order of time, it ought to be placed after that Of the Manners of the Church, as St. Augustin observes in his Retractations. He gives this Account of this Treatise Of the Quantity of the Soul, writ whilst he was in that City (Rome.) A Dialogue, wherein I raise several Questions concerning the Soul, viz. What is its Original; What its Nature; Whether it is extended; Why it was united with the Body; What alterations happen to it, either when it comes into, or goeth out of the Body. But, because I under∣took to Examine with exactness and curiosity, Whether it was extended; designing to shew, That it is not, after the manner of Bodies, tho it is some great Thing. This only Question hath given the Name to the whole Book; which therefore hath been Intituled, Of the Quantity of the Soul. Evodius is the Person whom St. Augustin introduceth, speaking in this Dialogue; as he says in the 101st. Letter: And so i•• was a Mistake, to put in the common Editions, the Name of Adeo∣datus, which is not found in the Ancient Manuscripts; and with much Reason they have re∣stor'd the Name of Evodius in the Last Edition. This Man propounds to St. Augustin Six Que∣stions: The First, Whence is the Soul? St. Augustin answereth, That this Question may be taken two ways; Where is the Habitation of the Soul? And, What is the Matter it is made of? Evodius desiring to have both these Questions clear'd to him, he saith, That the Habitation of the Soul is God, who created it. As for the Nature thereof, he declares, That he can neither Name nor Explain it, because it hath nothing like Corporeal Beings; and that it is single in its kind. Evodius his Second Question, is, What is the Quality of the Soul? St. Augustin answereth, That it is like God. The Third Question proposed by Evodius, concerns the Quantity of the Soul: St. Augustin affirms, That the Soul hath no Quantity, if by Quantity be understood Corporeal Extention; but that it hath, if by that Term is meant spiritual Greatness, Strength, and Power. St. Augustin, here discusses the Question of the Soul's Extention with care; and shews, by several Reasons, that it hath no Corporeal Dimensions. He distinguishes Men's Souls from those of Beasts; and grants to the Latter, Sense without Reason: Afterwards, he reckons up the excellent Qualities of Man's Soul, which he reduces to Seven Heads; whence he con∣cludes, That of all Creatures, Man's Soul is that which comes nearest to the Nature of God. With this he endeth this Treatise, without medling with the other Three Questions proposed by Evodius, viz. The Fourth, Why the Soul was united with the Body. The Fifth, What it is at the entrance into the Body: And the Sixth, What becomes of it when it goes out of it. This Treatise was composed by St. Augustin, in 388.

St. Augustin having left his Retirement, and being come back to Milan in the Year 381. began to write Treatises upon the Sciences, as he tells us in his Retractations. He could finish none but a Treatise of Grammar; but he began several others of Logick, Rhetorick, Geometry, Arith∣metick, and Philosophy. He did not know himself, what was become of these Discourses, when he composed his Retractations. At the same time he began, also, the Six Books of Musick; which he compleated after his return into Africa, about the Year 389. In the First Book he speaks of Musick in general: In the Second, of Syllables, and Feet: In the Three following, he dis∣courses of Measure, Harmony, and Verses: In the Last he shows, That Musick ought to raise up the Mind, and Heart, to a Divine, and Heavenly Harmony.

St. Augustin's Discourse of a Master, was written about the Year 395. It is a Dialogue be∣twixt himself, and his Son Adeodatus; wherein he shews, That it is not by Men's Words that we receive Instruction, but from the eternal Truth, viz. Jesus Christ the Word of God, who informeth us inwardly of all Truth.

The First of the Three Books of Free-Will, was composed at Rome, in 387. and the Two others in Africa, in 395. In the First, St. Augustin resolves that hard Question, touching the original of Evil: And having explained what it is to do Evil, he shews, That all manner of Evil comes from the Free-Will, which readily followeth the Suggestions of Lust; adding, That our Will makes us either happy, or unhappy: That if we are not happy, though we desire to be so, it is because we will not live conformably to the Law of God; without which, it is impossible to be Happy.

In the Second Book, the Difficulty alledged by Evodius, VVhy God hath left in Man a Li∣berty of Sinning, which is so prejudicial to him, hath started these Three other Questions. How we are sure that there is a God? Doth all Good come from him? Is the VVill free to do Good, as well as Evil? St. Augustin clears all these Difficulties, proving, That Free-VVill was given for a good End, and that we received it of God; that there is a Being more perfect than our Soul; that this Being is Truth it self, Goodness, VVisdom it self; that every good and perfect Thing cometh from it; and that Free-VVill is to be reckoned among the good Things. That there are Three sorts of Goods: The greatest are the Vertues that make us live VVell; the Idea's of Corporeal Objects, without which we cannot live VVell, are the least, and the Power of the Soul are the middle Ones: That the First cannot be abused; but both the Second, and the Last may be put to ill Uses: That Free-VVill is of the Number of these middle Goods. When the VVill adheres to the sovereign Good, it renders Man Happy; but when it departeth from that, to cleave to other Objects, then Man becometh Criminal, and so Unhappy. VVherefore neither the VVill, nor the Objects it embraceth, are Evil; but it is a Separation from God, that makes all Evil, and Sin; but God is not the Author of this Separation. From whence then is this Principle of Aversion? This St. Augustin clears in the Third Book. It is not Natural, since it is Guilty: It is Free, and Voluntary; and it is enough to say, That we may chuse, whether we will follow it, or no, to justifie God's Justice: But, how can this Liberty agree with the fore-knowledge of God? Nothing is more easie, accord∣ing to St. Augustin, in this Place. VVe are Free when we do what we please: But Prescience doth not take away our Will; on the contrary it supposes it, since it is a Knowledge of our Will. But are not the Creature's Faults to be imputed to the Creator? Why did he not make it impeccable? Had not Men been more perfect, if they had been created at first in the same condition with the Angels, and the glorified Saints that cannot be separated from the love of God? But St. Augustin replies, Doth it therefore follow, That because we may conceive a more Perfect State, therefore God was obliged to create us in that State? Should we not rather believe that he had his Reasons why he did not create us more Perfect? There are several sorts of Per∣fections. If the State of a Creature, that enjoyeth God, makes Soveraign Felicity; then the State of a Creature that is subject to Sin, which liveth in hope of recovering the Happiness which it lost, is also in God's Order, and exceedingly above that of a Creature that lies under the necessity of sinning eternally. The Condition of these last, is the worst of all; and yet God cannot be accused of Injustice, for giving a Being to Creatures which he knew would be eter∣nally miserable: He is not the Cause of their Sin: That Being which he gave them, is still a Perfection; their Sins and their Misery contribute to the Perfection of the Universe, and to exalt the Justice of God by the Punishment of their Sins. What then is the Cause of Sins? There is none but the Will it self, which freely and knowingly inclineth to do Evil. For if Sin, could not be resisted, it were impossible to know or to avoid it; and then there would be no Sin. Where∣fore then doth God punish Sins of Ignorance? How cometh it to pass that he blameth those Actions that are done out of Necessity? What mean those words of the Apostle, I do not the Good that I would, but the evil that I would not? All that, saith St. Augustin, is spoken of Men born since Mankind was condemned to Death, because of the First Man's Sin. For were this Natural to Man, and not a Punishment for his Sin; it is certain, there would be no Sin of Ignorance nor Necessity: But when we speak here of Liberty, we speak of that which Man had when God created him.

Here St. Augustin answers the greatest Objection that can be urged against Original Sin: Though, say they, both Adam and Eve have sinned, yet what had we done, wretched Persons that we are, to be thus abandoned to Ignorance and to Lust? Must we therefore be deprived of the knowledge of the Precepts of Righteousness? and when we begin to know them, Must we see our selves under a kind of Necessity not to keep them, by reason of the resistance of Lust? St. Augustin confesseth,

That this Complaint were just, if Men were under an impossibility of overcoming their Ignorance and Lust. But God being present every where to call his Creature to his Service, to teach him what he ought to believe, to Comfort him in his hopes, to confirm him in his Love, to help his Endeavours, and to hear his Prayers; man cannot complain, That that is imputed to him which he is unavoidably ignorant of; but then that he must blame himself, if he neglects to seek after that which he knows not. It is none of his fault, that he cannot use his broken Members; but he is guilty if he despiseth the Physician that proffers to cure him: for none can be ignorant that Man may profitably seek for the

Knowledge of what he knows not, and which he thinks to be necessary: And it is well enough known that Men ought humbly to acknowledge their Weakness, to obtain Help. In a word, If Men do that which is Evil out of Ignorance, or if it so happens, that they cannot do the Good which they would, there is Sin in that; because it is in consequence of the First Man's Sin committed with full liberty. This first Sin deserved the following.

There remained yet a considerable Difficulty, Why the Innocent Soul becometh subject unto Sin by it's Union with the Body? To explain this, St. Augustin mentions four several Opinions concerning the Original of Souls. The First is, That the Soul is formed from the Parents. The Second is, That God creates new ones at Mens Birth. The Third is, That Souls being created beforehand, God causeth them to enter their respective Bodies. The Fourth is, That they come down into the Bodies of their own accord: Now, he judging all these Opinions equally proba∣ble, and that it was as yet undecided, he endeavoureth to prove, that a Reason may be given for Original Sin, what Opinion soever one holds of the Original of the Soul.

He cometh at last to that particular Difficulty concerning the Children that die as soon as they are born. As for those that have received Baptism, though without knowledge, he saith, That it is Piously and Justly believed (for these are the terms he makes use of Satis p•••• recte{que} Creditur) that the Faith of those who present the Child to be baptized, supplies for that of the Child: As to the Pain and Sorrow which they suffer, having not deserved them by their Sins, St. Augustin saith, That God hath his Ends in permitting their Sufferings, and that perhaps he will recompence them for these Sufferings, as the Church believeth of the holy Innocents killed by Herod, who are reckoned among the Martyrs; having thus salved these Difficulties, he makes other useless Queries concerning the Sin of Adam.

St. Augustin observes in his Retractations, that he designed nothing in these Books, but to oppose their Opinion, who deny the original of Evil to be from Free-Will; pretending that if this were true, God must be the Author of it, introducing thereby an Eternal and Immutable Subsistency o Evil; That he did not enlarge upon it, nor treat of Predestination or Grace, whereby God prepares the Wills of Men, that they might make good use of their Liberty. Yet, when there was occasion to speak of it, he says something by the by, without making any stop to defend it. Wherefore Pelagius and the Pelagians, alledged several Expressions in favour of Free-Will, which St. Augustin had used in his Books: But St. Augustin shews, That what he said of Free-Will, is consistent enough with his System of Grace, and that he established all the Principles of it: This he proves by Passages taken out of these Books, where he affirms, That every good thing comes from God, and that Man cannot be delivered from Ignorance, and the necessity of Sinning, but by God's help.

The two Books upon Genesis against the Manichees, were composed by St. Augustin after his return into Africa, about the Year 389. There he refuteth those impertinent Objections which the Manichees made concerning the Three first Chapters of Genesis, by giving a reasonable Exposi∣tion of them. He insists most upon the literal sence; but sometimes he goes out of the way, and only gives an Allegorical one. As St. Augustin designed to benefit all Men by this Book; and particularly, to inform the common People that were abused by the Manichees, so he writ it with all the clearness and simplicity he could: In his Retractations, he explaineth some Passages that were misconstrued by the Pelagians; especially two, one against the Necessity of Grace, and the other against Original Sin.

The Books of the Manners of the Church, and of the Manichees, were composed at Rome by St. Augustin, soon after his Baptism, about the Year 387. as himself witnesseth in his Retracta∣tions. It is very probable that he revised them after his return into Africa, seeing he mentions them in the first of those Treatises lately named. His design was to confound the Insolence and Vanity of the Manichees, who gloried in a vain Temperance; and under that Pretence, exalted themselves above the Catholicks: Wherefore in these two Books he shews the opposition of the true Christian's Manners, to those of the Manichees; proving how much the counterfeit Vertues which these made their boast of, were inferior to the real Vertue of Christ's Disciples.

In the Book of the Manners of the Church, he layeth down, as the first ground of Morality, That God alone is the Soveraign Good of our Souls; from which truth, he inferrs, That all things must have respect to God, and that we are to love him above all things; and proves this first Principle of Christian Ethicks by Testimonies of the Old and New Testament. He shews, That all the Vertues are but so many different Expressions of this Love; That Temperance is that love, which keeps it self pure and uncorrupt for God: Fortitude, is a love that endureth all things with ease, for God's sake: Justice is a love that serveth God only, and by reason of that, procures Good to all Creatures that are subjected to him: Prudence is a love which has a light, to distinguish that which may help to bring us to God, from that which may hinder us in that way; even the love of our Neighbour is not a Vertue, but so far as it relates to God. He alone that loveth God, is capable of loving himself and his Neighbour, as he ought to do. This Reflection giveth St. Augustin an Opportunity of speaking of the Duties of Society, and of what Christians owe one to another. Lastly, as Examples do often affect more than Precepts; so he produces several Precedents of vertuous Men in the Church, that he may raise a higher Notion of the Manners of the Catholicks. He sets forth the Examples of Hermits, Monks, and Nuns, who have quite severed themselves from the World, to spend their Lives in constant Abstinence, and in Exercises of Piety. He adds the Example of several vertuous

Ecclesiasticks, and of many holy Prelates, who kept themselves pure in the midst of a corrupt Age; and of an infinite Number of Christians, that led most exemplary Lives. He concludes this Book, by shewing, That the Examples of Evil Catholicks can be no pretence for Hereticks to separate from the Church; and that the Notions of the Manichees touching Marriage, are contrary to those of the Apostles.

He observeth much the same Method in his Book of the Manners of the Manichees: He begins it by refuting their Doctrine about the Nature and Original of Good and Evil: Afterwards he discovers their impious and superstitious Practices, in such a manner as renders them ridiculous and abominable; and then gives a relation of the Disorders whereof the greatest part of that Sect had been Convicted.

The Book of true Religion, is the last of those which St. Augustin writ before he was a Priest; He therefore made it about the Year 390. there he shews both the Excellencies and the Duties of the true Religion; That the Christian Religion is the only true one: and he refutes the Er∣rors of other Religions, and particularly of the Manichees concerning the two Natures. He speaks of Jesus Christ's Religion, in that lofty manner, as gives a very high Notion of it. I shall give an Analysis of his Principles. Religion is the only thing that can guide us to the Truth, to Vertue and Happiness. The Heathen Philosophers acknowledge the Falshood of the popular Religion, and yet approve the same by their outward worship. Since the Establish∣ment of Christianity, none can doubt but that it is the Religion which ought to be followed. Plato himself would have owned it, seeing that the loftiest Maxims of Philosophy, concerning the Divinity, and the necessity of Purifying the Soul, whereof he despaired of perswading the People, are not only Preached throughout the Earth, but also embraced and followed by an infinite number of Persons. The Philosophers must needs know God upon this occasion, and give place to him that did this Miracle. Neither Curiosity, nor Vain-glory ought to keep them from acknowledging the difference between the Proud Conjectures of a few Philosophers, and the Publication of a Doctrine that Cures the Soul, and reforms the Errors of all Nations. Re∣ligion is not to be sought for either among the Philosophers, since they approve by their Actions, the same Worship which they condemn in their Writings; nor among the Hereticks, who have no share in the Sacraments of the Church; nor among Schismaticks, who have separated them∣selves from the Church; nor among the Jews, who expect from God none but Temporal and Transitory Rewards; but only in the Church universally dispersed throughout the Earth, which makes use of the Errors of others for its own Good. The Church makes use of the Pa∣gans, as the Matter of her Works; Of Hereticks, as a Proof of the Purity of her Doctrine; Of Schisinaticks, as a Mark of her Stability; and of the Jews, as an Evidence of her Excellency: And so she inviteth the Heathen, thrusts out Hereticks, forsakes Schismaticks, goes before the Jews, and yet she openeth to all an entrance into the Mysteries, and a door of Grace, either by forming the Faith of the former, or by reforming the Errors of the latter, or by causing the last to return into her Bosom, or admitting the others into the Society of her Children. As for car∣nal Christians, she beareth with them for a time, as Straw which is serviceable to the Wheat upon the Floor; and because every one is either Straw or Wheat, according to the Motions of his Will, she suffers those that are in Sin or in Error till they are Accused, or till they undertake to defend their false Opinions with obstinate Animosity. But such as are cut off from the Church, do either return by Penance, or being carried away by a mischievous Liberty, they give up them∣selves to Vice; or they make a Schism, or frame an Heresie. Yea, very often God's Providence permits some vertuous Christians to be put out of the Communion of the Church, by Tumults and Disturbances excited against them by carnal Persons: but this Separation is not imputed unto them, and God notwithstanding crowneth them in secret, when they bear with that Injury patiently, without making a Schism from the Church, or setting up any new Heresie; Such Examples, saith St. Augustin, seem rare, but yet there are some, and more than can be believed. Having thus rejected the false Religions, he concludes, That we must hold to that of Christ, and to that Church which is Catholick; and which is so called, not only by her own Children, but also by her very Enemies. The first Ground of this Religion is History and Prophecy, which discovers to us the Oeconomy that God's Providence hath made use of in process of times for the Salvation of Men. That after this Belief, we ought to purifie our Hearts, to render them capable of knowing the Trinity, the Incarnation, and other Articles of the Creed. That Here∣sies serve to clear the Mysteries. After this, he discourseth of the Soul; shewing after what manner it becometh, as it were, Earthly and Carnal by loving the Body; and how it gets out of that Unhappy State, by turning to God and overcoming disorderly Affections by the Grace of God. He treateth of the Nature and Fall of Angels. He shews, That Sin must be voluntary; That Death, Weakness, and Pain, are Punishments for Sin; and yet are not unprofitable, because they wean us from Corporeal Things: He resumes his Discourse of the Mystery of the Incarna∣tion, and saith, That God's Bounty towards Men, never appeared so much as in that Mystery; That the Word of God of the same Substance and Co-eternal with the Father, vouchsafed to make himself Man like unto us, to deliver us from our Sins: That he hath used no force or violence to draw us to himself; That he hath manifested himself to be God by Miracles, and Man by his Sufferings; That he hath appointed his Example for a Remedy against all the disorderly Passions of Men; That his Life is a continual Instruction, and his Resurrection, an Evidence that we may hope to be one day delivered from all sorts of Evils; That he hath taken off the Veil from

the Figures of the Old Law; That he hath abolished the Ceremonial Ordinances, with which the Jews were over-loaden; That he hath instituted few Sacraments indeed, but very wholsom ones to preserve Society in his Church; That he hath perfected our Morals, by encreasing the number of Precepts, but that at the same time he hath given Men strength to practise them. He treateth here of the Nature and Original of Evil, shewing that it is not a Corporeal Sub∣stance, but consists in a vicious adhaesion of the Will to Corporeal Beings. He runs through the several Conditions of Men, and the Means to find out Remedies for all their Distempers. He discovereth the Use that is to be made both of Authority and Reason to cure Man, and ap∣plieth both to take him off from the Creature. He hath several curious Speculations upon the Knowledge and the Affections of Men; and particularly he examines the three principal Passions, Pleasure, Ambition and Curiosity, and layeth down very profitable Precepts for Piety and Man∣ners. He recommends the Reading of the holy Scripture, distinguishing the several Explica∣tions, and giving some Rules for the understanding of it. The whole Work is concluded with an Exhortation to all Men to embrace the True Religion.

In his Retractations he maketh some Remarks upon this Treatise; most of them are of small consequence; these are some of the most important. He had said, That Sin was so necessarily Voluntary, that an Action could not be Sin, if it was not Voluntary. He justifies this Assertion in his Retractations: but he adds, That Sins committed through Ignorance or Lust, are in some sort Voluntary, because they cannot be committed without Will: and that even Original Sin is Voluntary, in this sence, because it was the Will of the First Man, that made it Hereditary to all his Posterity. He observeth likewise, upon what he had said, That Jesus Christ had done nothing by Violence, but only used Counsels and Exhortations: That he did not then reflect upon the Action of Jesus Christ, when he drove the Merchants out of the Temple with Scourges, that came thither to Buy and Sell; but saith he, That cannot be looked upon as a violent Action: Sed quid hoc aut quantum est? Upon what he had said, That Miracles were ceased in his time, lest Men should still cleave to Sensible Things, and their Minds be too much ac∣customed to them; he noteth, That these words are not to be taken strictly, seeing that Miracles are still wrought in the Church, and that himself had seen some at Milan.

The Rule, which is the last Piece of this Tome, is indeed St. Augustin's; but he wrote if for Nuns, and not for Monks. Some body took it out of the 109th. Epistle, and fitted it for Men. This Alteration has been long made.

As they have placed by themselves, at the latter end of each Tome, those Pieces which are none of St. Augustin's, and yet have some relation to those contained in that Volume; so at the end of this, there are the Treatises of Grammar, Logick, Categories and Rhetorick, that were attributed to St. Augustin in the former Editions; perhaps, because he saith himself, in his Re∣tractations, That he had began some Treatises upon those Sciences: but his Discourses were written in the form of Dialogues, and like that of Musick; where he makes use of that Science, to raise up the Mind of Man to his Creator; but these are neither Dialogue-wise, nor fit to lift up Mens Minds towards God. The Manner how they are written, and the Methods observ'd in them, are very different from those of St. Augustin. In a word, There are in those Treatises several Observations unworthy of that Father, and contrary to his Opinions. The Discourse of Grammar, begins indeed with the same words that St. Augustin hath noted in his Retracta∣tions; but they have been added, and are not to be found in the Manuscripts.

The Author of the Book of Categories, has a great Esteem for Aristotle's Philosophy; and saith, That he could scare understand his Book of Categories with Themistius his help: Whereas St. Augustin, who had no great Esteem for Aristotle's Philosophy, assureth us, That he under∣stood his Categories, without Labour, and without a Tutor. The Name of Adeodatus, that was inserted into the Printed Copies, is not found in the Manuscripts.

The Monastick Rules, which are at the latter end of this Volume, are rejected with Common Consent. The last, wherein St. Benedict's Rule is quoted, is, if we believe Holstenius, written by A••lredus Rievallensis, an Abbot in England, who flourished in the Twelfth Century; and indeed it is in the Catalogue of this Author's Works, published [by Bale,] in the Second Century of English Writers: part of it is among St. Anselm's Works.

The SECOND TOME.

THE Second Tome of St. Augustin's Works, containeth his Letters; which do not only re∣present * 1.151 the Genius and Character of that holy Father, but contain also very important Points of Doctrine, Discipline and Morality. In the last Edition, they are placed according to the Order of Time; for which Arguments are brought in a Preface. They are divided into Four Classes. The First contains those which he writ before he was Bishop, from the Year 386. to 395. In the Second, are those which he writ from the Year 396. to the time when the Ca∣tholick Bishops had a Conference at Carthage with the Donatists, and the breaking out of the Pelagian Heresie in Africa, that is, to the Year 410. The Third comprehends those that were

written from the Year 411. to the end of his Life, that is, to 430. And the Fourth contains those whereof the time is not justly known, though they were certainly written after he was * 1.152 made Bishop. There are Two hundred and seventy in all. The Benedictines have taken away some Treatises, which were put among the Letters; and they have added those which he An∣swered. And lastly, Some are added, that were not published before.

The thirteen or fourteen first are about Philosophical Matters that St. Augustin used to dis∣course about with his Friends, when he was first Converted.

The First was written by St. Augustin to Hermogenianus, about the latter end of the Year 380. concerning the Books that he wrote against the Academicks. He tells him what his Aim was in writing them, and asketh his Advice about what he had said concerning those Philosophers. About the latter end of the Third Book, he commends the Academicks, and saith, That he was so far from Condemning them, that he had Imitated them. He blameth the false Acade∣micks of his own time, and calleth them stupid who believed the Soul to be Corporeal. He concludes, with saying, That he flatter'd not himself with triumphing over the Academicks, as Hermogenianus said; but that he thought himself happy, for being above despair of finding the Truth, which is the Food of the Soul; and that he had thereby broken that troublesom Chain which hinder'd him from fast'ning, as one may say, to the Breasts of the True Philosophy.

In the Second Letter, to Zenobius, he testifies his Sorrow for his being Absent, and his Impa∣tience to see him again, that they might resolve a Question which he had begun to examine. This Letter was written the same time with the foregoing.

The Third, to Nebridius, is about his Books of Soliloquies, composed in the beginning of the year 387. He speaketh there of his Happiness of having attained to the Knowledge of some particular Truths, and particularly of those concerning our Nature; confessing withal, That he was ignorant of many things. Among things unknown to Man, he proposeth these: Why the World is of such Bigness? or rather, How big it is? Why it is where it is, rather than any where else? He observes, That Bodies may be infinitely divided; and, That there is no Quantity but may be both infinitely encreased and diminished: That it is not so with Num∣bers, which may be infinitely encreased, but not diminished proportionably, seeing there is no∣thing below Unity.

In the next, directed to the same, and written about the same time, St. Augustin acquaints him with the Progress that he had made in the Knowledge of the Truth, during the time of his Retirement. We have not the other Letters, which he writ at that time to Nebridius, as appears by the Ninth Book of Confessions.

The Fifth and Sixth, are Letters written in Africa, by Nebridius, to St. Augustin, about the end of the Year 388. or the beginning of 389. In the First, Nebridius pitieth St. Austin, that he was interrupted in the Contemplation of the Truth by other Businesses. And in the Seeond, he tells him his Notion, That Memory cannot act without Imagination; and, That the Imagi∣nation draws her Images of Things from itself, and not from the Senses. St. Augustin resolves both these Questions in the Seventh Letter. To the former, he answereth, That we remember things which cannot be represented by Sensible Idea's: whence he concludes, That there is a Memory independent upon the Imagination. To the latter, That there are Three sorts of Images or Phantoms, in our Imagination; that some are transmitted by the Senses, and these represent such things as we have seen and felt. That the Second, that are formed by Imagina∣tion, represent such things as we never saw; and which, perhaps, are not, but which we fansie, or suppose to be, or to have been: And that the last arise from the Consideration of some Spe∣culative Truths, as Numbers and Dimensions. That without doubt, the first sort do not pro∣ceed from Sense; but we must grant, that the Second have their Original from Sense, since they represent nothing but what is true. That the last, though they seem to spring from the Reasons and Principles of Sciences, which lead not into Error, yet are false; because they re∣present Spiritual Things, as if they were Corporeal and Extended. Whence he concludes, That the Soul doth not imagine the things that it does not see, and that it doth not feel, but either by lessening or by encreasing the Images of what it hath seen or felt.

The following Letters, to the Thirteenth, are directed to Nebridius, though the Years are not precisely known: it is certain, that they were written before St. Augustin was Ordained, be∣cause Nebridius died before that time. In the Eighth, Nebridius asketh St. Augustin, How Daemons can make us Dream? St. Augustin answers him in the Ninth, That they do it, by stir∣ring those Parts of the Body which can make an Impression upon the Soul, after the same man∣ner as Musical Instruments excite in us certain Thoughts, Passions and Affections. In the Tenth, St. Augustin proposes to Nebridius, To live together retired: And he setteth forth the Advantages of Solitude. In the Eleventh, he endeavours to explain that Question in Divinity, How the Three Persons being inseparable, the Son alone was made Man? Having diligently studied how to answer it, he tells Nebridius, That the understanding of Mysteries, is got only by Piety: That this is the surest way to compass it, and therefore that Men ought chiefly to give up themselves to the Practice thereof. He had also handled that Question in the Twelfth Letter, but it is imperfect. In the Thirteenth, he advises Nebridius not to think any longer, that the Soul hath another thinner Body than that which we see, it being impossible to resolve that Question, since our Senses cannot discern such a Body, and Reason cannot discover any such thing to us.

In the Fourteenth, he answers Two other Questions proposed by Nebridius. The First, con∣cerning the Sun; which is of small importance, and hath no difficulty. The Second deserves more Reflection: Nebridius asks St. Augustin, Whether the Knowledge of God, includeth not only a general Idea of Mankind, but also an Idea of every Man in particular? St. Augustin answereth, That in the Creation, God had only a Prospect of the general Idea of Mankind; but yet that there is in God a particular Idea of every Man. He clears his Answer by this Example: The Idea of an Angle, is one single Notion, as well as that of a Square: so when I design to make an Angle, one only Idea offers it self; and yet when I go about to describe a Square, I must have in my Mind the Notion of Four Angles joined together: Even so each Man was Formed after the particular Idea of a Man; but in the Creation of People, it is no longer the particular Idea of one Man, but the general Idea of many seen and conceived all at once. This is refined Metaphysicks.

The Fifteenth Letter is written to Romanianus; to whom St. Augustin promiseth his Book of The True Religion, which he finished not long before he was Ordained Priest. Which proves, That this Letter was written about the Year 390. He exhorts Romanianus to renounce the Cares of the World, and to seek after solid and lasting Goods.

The Sixteenth Letter, is, a Discourse written by Maximus, a Grammarian of Madaura, who disputeth against the Christian Religion. He owns, That there is but One Sovereign Being; and One only God; but pretends, That it is the same God whom the Heathen worship under several Names, which signifie his several Attributes. He cannot endure, that in the Christian. Religion, they should preferr Martyrs of obscure and strange Names, before those Immortal Gods whose Names are so famous. He desires of St. Austin to let him know who that particular God is, whom the Christians suppose to be present in secret and retired places.

St. Augustin answereth this in the Seventeenth Letter, discovering the Falshood of this Pagans Rallery, by other Ralleries that are more Spiritual. At the latter end of his Letter, he de∣clares, That among Christians and Catholicks the Dead are not adored: And, That no Divine Ho∣nours are done to any Creature, but only to God, who created all things. Thefe Letters were written before the Worship of the Gods was prohibited by the Imperial-Law of the Year 391. whil'st St. Augustin was retir'd at Tagasta, near Madaura, and before he was a Priest, namely, about the Year 390.

It is believed, that the Eighteenth, Nineteenth, and Twentieth Letters, were written before St. Augustin was Ordained Priest; because he gives himself no Title in the Inscription, and be∣cause they seem more florid than those which he wrote after he was in Orders. The Eighteenth is directed to Coelestin••••s. There he distinguishes Beings into Three Natures: The First Moveable in Place and Time, and that's Body: The Second Moveable in Time, but not in Place, and that is the Soul: And the Third is Immoveable in Time and Place▪ and this is God. The First is incapable either of Happiness or Unhappiness: The Last is essentially Happy: The Middle Being is Unhappy when it cleaveth to the Beings of the First sort, but Happy when it carries it self to the Supreme Being. In the Nineteenth Letter, he exhorteth Caius, to whom he sendeth his Works, to continue in those good Dispositions of Mind wherein he left him. In the Twentieth, he giveth Antoninus Thanks for his Love, and for the good Opinion he had of him; with excellent Instructions, desiring the Conversion of his whole Family.

St. Austin was Ordained Priest by Valerius, Bishop of Hippo, who being a Greek, and not able to speak Latin fluently enough to Preach to the People, cast his Eyes upon St. Augustin to Preach in his room. St. Augustin being sensible how hard it was to discharge the Duties of that Station, entreateth Valerius, in the Twenty first Letter, to let him withdraw for a time, that he might fit himself, by Study and Prayer, for the Employment which he had laid upon him. This Letter is very instructive for those that are to be promoted to Ecclesiastical Dignities: It begins with this curious Reflection; That there is nothing more acceptable, especially at this time, than the Dignity of a Priest, a Bishop and a Deacon; nothing more pleasant and easie than the Exer∣cise of these Offices, when Men will do things only of Course, and flatter others in their Disorders: But on the other side, That there is nothing more mischievous, pernicious and damnable before God. On the contrary, nothing is more glorious and happy in God's account; but at the same time, nothing more difficult, painful and dangerous, especially at this time, than the Exercise of those Functions, when Men resolve to discharge them according to the Rules of that holy Warfare which we profess to follow. He declareth, That though he wept very heartily on the Day of his Ordination, fore-seeing the Dangers he was exposed unto; yet he did not then know his Weakness so well as he has done since.

He observes, That he was Ordained, when he thought to have taken some time to study the Scriptures. He begs time till Easter, to prepare himself for Preaching, by Study and Prayer. This Letter was written about the beginning of the Year 391.

The T••enty second, to Aurelius, Bishop of Carthage, was written the following Year. St. Augustin laments the Feasts which they made in Church-Yards, and at the Martyrs Graves, under pretence of Religion, desiring Aurelius to give Order about them. He observes, That of the Three Vices condemned by St. Paul, in the Epistle to the Romans, namely, Drunkenness, Uncleanness and Discord, they seemed to punish but One in the Church, that was, Uncleanness: That the others were tolerated; yea, they thought to honour the Martyrs by their Drunken∣ness: That this Abuse was never in the Churches of Italy, or else it had been reformed by the

Care and Vigilancy of their Bishops; and that his Bishop wanted neither Zeal, nor Knowledge, to correct it in his Diocess: but that this Disorder was so rooted, that he thought there was no hope to see it abolished, but by the Authority of a Council. That if any particular Church was to do it, that of Carthage ought to begin. Yet, that such Abuses were not to be opposed by sharpness, roughness, or imperiousness; that Instructions were to be used, rather than Com∣mands; and Counsels, rather than Threatnings: That if there be need of Threatnings, they must be used in a lamenting manner, and only such as are found in Scripture; not to inspire them by Words, with the fear of Ecclesiastical Power, but with a Dread of the Divine Ven∣geance. And since the People was perswaded, That these Feasts were not only to the Honour of the Martyrs, but also gave ease to the Dead, he would have the Offerings, made in the Church for the Dead, to be done modestly, without Pomp and Affectation. He would not have them sold, but that the Money that was offered, should be immediately distributed to the Poor. Afterwards he reproves the Quarrels and Enmities betwixt the African Clergy.

The Twenty third Letter was written by St. Augustin, during his being a Priest, but what Year, is unknown. It is directed to a Donati••▪ Bishop, called Maximinus, who had Re-baptiz'd a Deacon of the Church that was become a Donatist. St. Augustin having been in∣formed, That this Bishop did not do Things like the other Donatists, prayeth him to let him know the Truth, and exhorts him, either to declare himself a Catholick, if he were not in that Point of the other Donatists Opinion; or to hold a Conference with him about his Sepa∣ration from the Catholick Church.

The 24th. and 25th. are Two Letters of Paulinus to Alypius, and to St. Augustin, written in the Year 394.

The 26th is a Letter from St. Augustin, to his old Disciple▪ Licentius; wherein he exhorts him to despise the World, making use of the Verses which Licentius had Dedicated to him. It was written after St. Paulinus, and St. Augustin were acquainted, about the Year 395.

The 27th. is an Answer from St. Augus••in, to St. Paulinus, written the same Year.

The 28th. to St. Jerom, was the beginning of their Quarrel. St. Augustin adviseth him ra∣ther to Translate into Latin the best of the Greek Authors, than to make a New Translation of the Scripture upon the Hebrew Text. He beginneth also the Dispute, about that Place, to the Galatians, which speaks of St. Peter's Dissembling; reproving St. Jerom for approving an officious Lye. This Letter was written in the Year 395.

The 29th. lately Published by the Benedictines from a Manuscript in the Library at St. Crosse, is directed to Alypius, then Bishop of Tagasta. There St. Augustin acquaints him, how he had, at last, compassed his Design of putting down, in the Church of Hippo, those Feasts that they were wont to make in the Church upon the Festival Days of the Martyrs: He repeats the Arguments that he used in his Sermons upon that Subject, that so Alypius might take the same Course, to abolish the same Abuse in his own Church. St. Augustin was but Priest, when he writ this Letter, and Alypius was newly chosen Bishop; which shews that it was written in the Year 395.

The 30th. is a Letter of St. Paulinus's, written to St. Augustin before he was Bishop. These are all the Letters of the First Classe.

The Second Classe.

THE Second Classe containeth the Letters written by St. Augustin, from the time of his be∣ing made Bishop, to the Conference at Carthage, before the breaking out of the Pelagian Heresie in Africa, that is from the Year of our Lord 396, to 410.

The First of the Letter, which is the 31st. written at the beginning of the Year 396. short∣ly after his Ordination, is directed to Paulinus. He thanks him for his Second Letters; and takes notice, That he was ordained Coadjutor to Valerius in the Bishoprick of Hippo, and in∣vites him to come over into Africa.

The 32d. is Paulinus's Answer.

The 33d. is to Proculianus, a Donatist Bishop at Hippo. St. Augustin being informed, That he designed to clear his Doubts by a Conference with him, offereth it to him, that they might agree, and put an end to the Schism. This Letter was written soon after he was made Bishop, Valerius being yet alive.

The 34th. was written, not long after the former: There he complaineth to Eusebius, That Proculianus, a Donatist Bishop at Hippo, to whom the foregoing Letter was directed, had ad∣mitted into his Sect, and▪ Re-baptiz'd a young Man, that used to beat his Mother, and threat∣ned to kill her; declaring, towards the end, That he was ready to conferr amicably with him, about the pretended Reasons of their Separation.

This Eusebius, who, in all Probability, was a Man of Note, that sided with the Donatists, having returned St. Augustin this Answer, That he would be no Judge betwixt Bishops; this Saint writ to him again, by the 35th. Letter, That he might be on that occasion, where there was no need of Judging; but only to know, Whether it was by Proculianus his Order, that the young Man was Re-baptiz'd; and, Whether he would enter upon a Conference? He Com∣plains

likewise, That the same Bishop had received, and Re-baptized a Sub-Deacon of the Church of Ispana; who being accused of having an infamous Commerce with some Virgins that were consecrated to God, was gone over to the Donatists to avoid the Chastisement which he deserved; and ever since led a scandalous Life. St. Augustin takes notice, that he dealt not so with those that proffered to come into the Church: If they be found guilty of any Crime; they are not admitted, but upon Condition t••at they submit themselves to the humiliation of Penance. He shews how abominable this Custom of the Donatists was, to perswade such as were to be chastised for their Disordets, to come over to them, and be Re baptized▪ At last he t••lls Eusebius, That if, by this means, he doth not obtain an Answer from Proculianus, he will cause these Things to be notifi▪d to him, formally by a publick Officer: He speaks, be∣side, of a Donatist Priest, who had been troublesome to one of the Church's Tenants; and of a Woman of that Party that had affronted him.

The thirty sixth Letter to Casulanus, concerning Saturday's Fast, seems to have been writ∣ten before St. Ambrose's Death, of whom he speaketh, as holding still the See of Milan; whereby it appears, that it belongs to the Year 396, or 397. There he refuteth the Writing of a certain Roman, who had asserted, That all Men were obliged to fast on Saturdays, according to the Practice of the Church of Rome. St. Augustin lay▪ down this Rule, That in those Things, where the Scripture hath determined nothing certain, the Customs received among Christians, or settled by our Ancestors, are to be instead of a Law, and no Contests ought to be admitted about such Matters. Afterwards he examineth the Writing which Casulanus sent him, and shews▪ that it is made up of false Suppositions, and unconcluding Consequences. Having answered this Writing, he explains his own Notion, saying, That he finds indeed, that Fasting is enjoyn'd in the Gospel, and in the Writings of the Apostles: but that neither Jesus Christ, nor the Apostles, ever appointed the days wherein we should fast, nor the days in which we ought to forbear. That he thinks it more convenient not to fast upon the Saturday; and yet whether we fast or fast not, we ought to maintain Peace; and this Precept of the A∣postle is to be observed, Let not him that eateth, condemn him that eateth not; neither let him that eateth not, condemn him that eateth. That there is no great Inconvenience in observing the Saturday's Fast, since the Church of Rome observes it as well as some other Churches: But it would prove a great Scandal to fast upon Sundays; especially, since the Manichees affect to command their Disciples to fast upon that day: That notwithstanding, it were pardonable to fast upon Sunday, for those who are able to carry Fasting so far, as to be more than a week without eating, that so they draw nearer to the Fast of Forty Days. St. Augustin saith, that some have done it, and that he was inform'd, That a certain Person had continued fasting full Forty Days. This is hard to be believ'd, yet St Augustin saith, that he heard it from credible Persons. Having refuted the Reasons of the Manichees, who affirming, That Sunday is to be kept as a Fast; he saith, that the Church observes fasting upon Wednesdays and Fridays; be∣cause the Jews resolved upon Wednesday to put Christ to Death, and Executed it upon Friday. That on Saturday, the Body of Jesus Christ having rested in the Grave, gave occasion to some to forbear fasting on that day, to mark thereby the resting of Christ's Flesh; and that others fast upon it, because of that Humiliation of our Saviour: but that the former Celebrate that Fast once only, on the Saturday before Easter, to renew the Remembrance of the Disciple's Sorrow. All these Notions having but little Solidity, he concludes with an excellent Rule which St. Ambrose had taught him upon that Subject: For having asked his Opinion, concer∣ning his Mother's Scruple, who being at Milan, doubted whether she ought to observe Satur∣day's Fast, according to the Custom of her own Church, or according to the Custom of the Church of Milan, that observed no Fast on that day. This Holy Bishop an∣swer'd him, Let her do as I do. When I am here, I do not fast upon Saturdays; when I am at Rome, I fast upon that day: and so in what Church soever you are, keep to its Customs, if you mean to scandalize no body, or to be scandalized at no body. But because he was then in Africa, and that among the Churches of the same Countrey, and even among the Christians of the same Church, some fasted upon Saturdays, and others not, St. Augustin saith, That we must conform our selves to those that bear Rule over the People; and so he adviseth him to whom he writeth, not to resist his Bishop in that Case, but to do as he did.

The Thirty seventh Letter to Simplicianus, is a Preface to the Books that he Dedicated to that Bishop that were written in 397.

In the Thirty eighth to Profuturus, St. Augustin being sick, recommends himself to his Prayers, and desires to know what Bishop succeeded in the Primacy of Numidia, after the death of Megalius Bishop of Calama, who had been dead Twenty days. In the Council of Carthage, assembled in August, 397. Crescentianus wrote, that he was Primate of Numidia. Thus, the death of Megalius happening some time before, serves to fix the date of this Let∣ter. There are two excellent Notions of Morality; the one of Patience, and the other a∣gainst Anger. The former is this: Tho' I susfer, yet I am well, because I am as God would have me to be, for when we will not what he wills, 'tis we that are in the fault, and not he, who can neither do, nor permit any thing but what is just. The latter is equally valuable: It is incomparably better to shut the door of our Heart against just Anger when it offers to come in, than to give it entrance, being uncertain whether we can turn it out again, when we find it growing from a Thredd to a Beam.

The Th••••ty ninth Letter, is a Note from St. Jerom, who recommends Praes••••ius, and pre∣sents his Service to Alypius. It is written in the Year 397.

The Fortieth from St. Augustin to St. Jerom, is about their Disagreement, concerning St. Peter's Action. St. Augustin also desires to know the Title of his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers, and exhorts him to make a Collection of Origen's Errours, and of those of other Hereticks.

The Forty first Letter written in Alypius and St. Augustin's Name, to Aurelius Bishop of Car∣thage, commending that Bishop for preferring the good of the Church, before the Honour of the Episcopal Order; by permitting, contrary to Custom, that Priests should Preach God's Word in his presence. This Letter was written within few Years after St. Augustin was a Bishop.

The Forty second, is a Note from St. Augustin to St. Paulinus, never before Published, intreating him to write to him, and to send him his Book against the Gentiles. It is of the lat∣ter end of the Year 397.

The Forty third, and forty fourth Letters to Glorius Eleusius, give an Account of a Conference, which St. Augustin held in the City of Tubursica, with some Donatists, in the Year 397, or 398. as it is proved in the Preface to the Letters. In the first, he produces the Judgments that were given against the Donatists: He justifies Caecilian's Innocency, and shews, that those who condemned him, were suspected Judges; and that the Authors of the Donatist Schism, were guilty of the Crime which they charged upon others. He adds, That it was to no purpose to impute to the Church the pretended Crimes of the dead; since the Church may tolerate wicked men, without ceasing to be a Church. That the Donatists themselves suffer among them very dis∣orderly Persons; that Maximianus had caused Primianus to be condemned, as Majorinus had formerly procured a Sentence against Caecilian, by caballing and Intrigue: That the Sect of the Donatists being limited within Africa, and having no Communion with the Churches that were dispersed throughout the VVorld, cannot be the Catholick Church. In this Let∣ter, there is that famous Sentence concerning the Authority of Councils. Let us suppose, that Pope Miltiades, and the other Bishops, who gave Judgment with him, have not judged right, then we may have recourse to a Plenary Council of the whole Church, in which the cause of the Donatists ought to be debated again with those that judged it, and their Sentence reversed, if it shall be found that they have given a wrong Judgment.

The Second Letter contains a particular Conference of St. Augustin with Fortuniusa Dona∣tist Bishop, which was spent in Reproaches on both sides, for the Villainies that were com∣mitted on both sides, without medling with the main Question, of the Schism. St. Augustin re∣quested, that the Dispute might be ended in a greater Assembly, and in what place they pleased, where Christians of all Parties might meet. In this Letter, there is an Account of a Letter of the false Council of Sardica, of Eastern Bishops; which Fortunius quoted, because it was directed to Donatus: St. Augustin not knowing the Story, was perplexed; but finding that St. Athanasius was condemned in that Letter, he did not mind it.

The Forty fifth Letter, is a Note to Paulinus, written a Year after the foregoing, in 398.

The Forty sixth, from Publicola to St. Augustin, contains several Cases of Conscience, which this Lord proposed concerning the Oath, whereby they obliged the Barbarians to swear by their Gods, That they would preserve the Fruits of the ground faithfully, which they would not otherwise have preserv'd, had they not been bound by that Oath: About the use of Meats, and other Things offered to Idols; and concerning the killing of one that assaults, or robs us.

In the next, St. Augustin endeavours to decide the Qustions proposed by Publicola, concern∣ing those Matters. Upon the first he saith, That that Oath ought not to be required of the Barbarians, but that use may be made of them, after they have taken it; and he that uses their Service, hath no share in the Oath. that those that swear by false Gods, are doubly guil∣ty, if they keep not their Oath, both of an abominable Oath, and of Perjury. As to things offered to Idols he answereth Publicola upon several Particulars, as that there is no danger in making use of the Meats offered to them, when it is not known, and it is too nice a scruple to forbear the use of those things which have been applyed to prophane uses, if it be not done with respect to that. To the Last Query he saith, That no man ought to kill any Man, upon any Account whatsoever; except perhaps, says he, Soldiers, or such as are obliged to it by the Duties of some publick Office. But that we are not forbidden to secure our selves against the Violences of others, by making use of VValls, and, That if a Thief be killed or wounded with the VVall falling upon him, or he falling from the VVall, the thing is not to be im∣puted to him that built the VVall. This Letter was written before the Temples of Idols were quite demolished, in 399.

In the Forty eighth Letter to Eudoxius, Abbot of a Monastery in the Island of Capraria, St. Au∣gustin exhorteth both him and his Monks to make good use of the Quiet they enjoy'd, that so they might be ready to leave it whensoever the Church should have need of them. This Letter is supposed to have been writ in the Year 398.

In the 49th. He asketh of Honoratus a Donatist Bishop, a Reason, Why the Catholick Church, which ought to be Universal over the whole Earth, came to be limited to Africa, and was no where to be found but among the Donatists? The time of this Letter is not very certain.

The ••0th. Letter to the Principal Persons of the Colony of Suffectum, is a Complaint upon the account of a Murder of 60 Christians whom they Massacred, because their Hercules was taken away; He jests upon them, promising to have another made for them: But he concludes with these upbraiding words, But do you also restore to us that great number of our Brethren, whose Lives you have taken away; for if we restore to you your Hercules, it is reasonable you should restore the•• to us. Baronius thinketh that this Massacre happened upon occasion of an Edict made against Idolatry in 399. But the Translator of St. Augustin's Letters, affirms, That this is none of his, for two Reasons; First, Because he thinks it is Impertinent; Secondly, Because it is not written in St. Augustin's Stile. I am much of his mind as to the Second Point, but I cannot allow the First; for though this Letter does not seem to be grave enough for such a Subject, yet the Rallery is sharp, which sometimes is more effectual than a Pathetical Discourse. However it is ancient, and of St. Augustin's time.

In the 51st, Letter, St. Augustin objects to Crispinus, a Donatist Bishop at Calama, the Dissen∣tion between the Primianists, and the Maximianists, as an Answer to what the Donatists urged against the Church. It was written after the Death of Optatus Gildonianus in 399, and before that of Praetextatus, who died in 400, when St. Augustin wrote his Books against Parme∣nianus.

In the 52d. He exhorts Severinus, his Kinsman, to forsake the Donatists, and to come into the Catholick Church. It may be of the same time with the foregoing.

The 53d. is written in St. Augustin's Name, and of two of his Collegues, Fortunatus and Aly∣pius, to Generosus, a Catholick of Constantina; and contains an Answer to a Letter written by a Donatist Priest to this Man, to seduce him; wherein he pretends to have received an Order by an Angel from Heaven, to oblige him to embrace the Donatist's Party.

St. Augustin proves in that Letter, That the Donatist's Party cannot be the true Church. 1. Because they have no Succession of Bishops from the Apostles. To prove this, he produces the Succession of the Bishops of Rome, from St. Peter to Anastasius. 2. He quoteth the Acts of Minutius Felix, which shew, That Silvianus the Predecessor of a Donatist Bishop of Cirta was a Traditor. 3. He urges all the Determinations that had been made against the Do∣natists. 4. He confesses, That there may be wicked Men in the Church, and urges against the Donatists the Dissentions between the Primianists, and the Maximianists.

The 54th. and 55th. Letters to Januarius, are mentioned in St. Augustin's Detractations; where they are placed among the Books that were written about the Year 400: They contain several very useful Decisions about Church-Discipline: He layeth it down at first as a Principal Matter, That Jesus Christ, whose yoke is easie, his burthen light, hath instituted but few Sacraments; the observation whereof is as Easie, as the Wonders which they represent to us, are Sublime. Such is Baptism, the Communion of his Body and Blood, and other things which the Scripture enjoyns us to observe, excepting those that belong to Moses's Law. But as to those that are observed by Tradition, being not written, if they be universally observed, we ought to look upon them as settled either by the Apostles themselves, or by General Councils, whose Autho∣rity is very great in the Church; as the Annual Celebration of the Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension of Jesus Christ, and of the coming of the Holy Ghost, and of other things of this Na∣ture, which are generally observed through the whole Church. As to those that are variously observed in divers places, as Fasting upon Saturdays, which is practised in some places, and in others not, Communicating every Day, or only upon certain Days; offering daily or only upon Sundays and Saturdays: There is a Liberty for those Things, and for all others of the like Nature. And there is no better Rule for a Wise and Prudent Christian, than to follow what he seeth practised in the Church where he is. For what is clearly seen to be neither against Faith, nor good Manners, ought to be indifferently received; and the good of a Society requireth, That Men should hold to what they find established among those with whom they live. He gives an Account of what he had heard St. Ambrose say in that case; and having laid down this Rule as the Ground of all that he was to say, he speaks particularly of frequent Communion; That some believe, That it is good to Communicate daily; but to do it more worthily, certain Days are to be set apart, in which they live after a purer and more reserved manner: Others, on the contrary judge, That when Men are not Guilty of those Sins for which Penance is enjoyned, and them∣selves forbidden to come to the Communion of the Body of Jesus Christ; that they ought to come daily to the Eucharist, as a Remedy to preserve them still. He reconcileth these two, by adding a third Advice; in which he exhorts them both to Peace, and leaves it to every one, to act according as he shall be guided by the light both of Faith and of Piety, since neither of them Profane the Body of Christ; but on the contrary strive to honour it. He proposes the Examples of Zacchaeus and the Centurion, whereof the one presently received Jesus Christ with Joy into his House; and the other, judged not himself worthy, that he should come under his Roof.

Secondly, St. Augustin saith, That a Traveller ought to observe the Customs of the Place where he is, and not require those of his own Country. Thus when a Man comes into a Coun∣try where they Fast upon Thursdays in Lent; he ought to Fast with them, though they Fast not in his Country; for fear of disturbing the Peace by unprofitable Disputes.

These Principles being laid down, he answereth Januarius his Questions. The First is about the Hour of Offering upon the Holy Thursday, Whether it should be done in the Morning or in the Evening? Or, Whether we ought to Fast and not to Offer till after Supper; because it is

said, That it was after Supper that Jes•••• Christ took Bread; or, whether we ought not to Sup till the Offering be over? St. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ That this is one of those things which are neither settled by Scripture, nor 〈◊〉〈◊〉 observed throughout the Church; and so every one is to follow the Custom of his own Church, there being nothing of either side inconsistent either with Faith or Good Manners; and that Alterations, though Useful in themselves, cause Distur∣bances: That Christ's Example is no Law in this case, otherwise the whole Church is in an Error to enjoyn the receiving the Eucharist fasting, which the Apostles first received after Sup∣per; but that since it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, out of reverence to so great a Sacrament, that the Body of Jesus Christ should be received into Christian's Mouths before any other Meat: and therefore this Custom is observed throughout the World. And yet some others believing upon good Grounds. That for a more exact Commemoration of Christ's Death, it was conve∣nient to offer and receive once a Year upon Holy Thursday▪ after Eating: This Custom can no more be Condemned, than that of Bathing upon that Day; neither are they to blame that Fast and Bathe not; wherefore the Sacrifice is offered twice, once in the Morning for these last, and once in the Evening for the first.

In the Second Letter to Januarius, which is the 5••th. St. Augustin goeth on to treat of the Ceremonies of the Church: Shewing, Why Easter is always celebrated after the Fourteenth Day of the Moon in March; Why Christ would rise again the Third Day, and the next Day after the Sabbath; What signifieth the Day of Christ's Crucifixion, and that in which his Body remained in the Grave, and that of his Resurrection; Why Lent is kept before the Resurrection; Why the Holy Ghost came down the Fiftieth Day after the Resurrection, with many other things, whereof he gives Mystical Reasons, very edifying and very proper to shew how both our Saviour's Death and Resurrection ought to operate upon us.

He adds several things concerning the Ceremonies of the Church: He observes, That Lent is kept throughout the whole Church, as well as the Solemnity of the Holy Days which were de∣signed for those that are newly Baptized: That the Custom of Singing Hallelujah from Easter to Whitsuntide is not general; because, though it is Sung every where at that time; yet in some Churches it is Sung at other times also. As to the Praying Standing at the same time, he durst not affirm it to be an universal Custom. The Washing of Feet was not constantly used every where. He approves of Singing in the Church, though it was not universally established. He Condemns those that introduce new Customs, if they are useless; and deolares how much he is troubled, to see those Wholesome Things neglected which the Church prescribes; and that all is full of Humane Institutions. He affirms, That endeavour should be used, to abolish all sorts of things, which are neither Expressed in Scripture, nor Enjoined by Councils, nor Confirmed by the universal Practice of the Church; but are done after different manners, according to the difference of Places, though no reason can be shewed why they were at first established. For, saith he, though it doth not ••••••ear that they are contrary to the Faith, yet it is sufficient to make us reject them; That they are servile Customs and Burdens to our Holy Religion: And which from that Liberty, wherein God's Mercy hath established it, prescribing but few Sacraments; the design and Vertue whereof are clearly Manifest, make it fall into a kind of Slavery, worse than that of the Jews▪ But as the Church encloseth much Straw, so it is forced to tolerate many things, yet without doing, or approving, yea without palliating, what it finds to be contrary to Faith or Good Manners. He afterwards blameth those who through Superstition abstain from certain Meats; and those who, that they may know what they have to do, will at all Adventures open the Book of the Gospel out of a Superstitious Custom. Lastly, He tells Januarius, That all Knowledge must have respect to Charity, which is the only end of all our Actions.

The 56th. and 57th. Letters were written to Celer, before the Conference at Carthage. He exhorts him to the Study of the Holy Scriptures, and to forsake the Donatist.

In the 58th. He applauds Pammachius, a Senator, for causing his Vassals that were Donatists to return to the Church. It seems to have been written at the latter end of 401▪ and sent by the Legates of the Council of Carthage the same Year.

The 59th. Is an Answer to Victorinus a Bishop; who writ to him, to come to a Council which he was then calling. He saith, That he could not be there, because he was indisposed; and besides, he would not have gone otherwise, upon the account of his Letter; because Xan∣tippus Bishop of Tagosa, pretended to the Primacy, which ought first to be determined. It appears by the 65th. Letter, that Xantippus was in the right, and that he was acknowledged Primate in 402. which shews that this Letter was written in 401. Now to understand this Letter, and all the rest of St. Augustin's, that speak of Primacy or Metropolitical Rights, we are to observe, That this Right belonged not in Africa to the Dignity of Towns, but to the Se∣niority of the Bishops.

In the 60th. St. Augustin acquaints Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, That Donatus and his Brother had left a Monastery against his will; and that such falls being ordinary to Men of that Profession, those do the Clergy an Injury, who admit Deserters from Monasteries into the Church again. That an ill Monk is so far from making a good Churchman, that on the contrary, it is hard to make a good Churchman of a good Monk; because, though there may be Purity enough on the one side, yet there is often want of Instruction on the other; or at least some other Imperfections which may make him unworthy of coming into the Church. Yet Aurelius had ordained Donatus, supposing that he had left the Monastery, by

St. Augustin's order, before that Canon was made; whereby it was forbidden to ordain a Monk of another Diocess. Wherefore St. Augustin writes to Donatus, That he was at liberty, to do what he pleased, if he was not acted by a Spirit of Pride: But as to his Brother, who was the cause of his desertion, You know, saith St. Augustin, what I think of it, but I have nothing to say to you as to that matter; for I dare not contradict the Opinions of so Wise and Charitable a Man as you are, and whom I ought to reverence so much. The Canon mentioned in that Letter, is that of the Council held the 13th. of September 401. and it is in the African Code, Chap. 80. which shews, That the Letter was written soon after.

The 61st. is written to Theodorus, to assure the Donatist Clergy, That if they returned to the Church, they should be admitted to the same Rank and Dignity, which they held before in their own Party. St. Augustin promises it solemnly and with an Oath. He confesseth, That there was no Evil in the Donatists, but only their Separation from the Church: That their Bap∣tism, their Ordination, their Vows and all their Sacraments were good; though unprofitable to them whil'st they wanted Charity.

Both the following Letters directed to Severus, Bishop of Milevis, are written about a Clerk, called Timothy, who had sworn, That he would never leave Severus, though he was of the Church of Hippo, and had performed the Office of Reader in that Diocess. St. Augustin pre∣tends, That the Oath which this Priest had taken, being disapproved by his Bishop, and not received by him with whom he had Sworn to abide, did not oblige him, nor free him from the Obligation which he was under to remain in that Church to which he belong'd. Yet he dealt very civilly with Severius; and though he caused Timothy to be ordained Sub-Deacon at Susanna, which belonged to the Diocess of Hippo, yet he sent him back to Severus, that he might have no occasion to complain of him. It was upon this occasion, probably, that a Canon was made in the Council of Milevis, of the 27th. of September, 402. whereby a Bishop is forbidden to detain a Clerk, who had performed the Office of Reader in another Diocess.

In the 64th. Letter to Quintianus, he exliorts him not to be Impatient, because Aurelius defer∣red to give Judgment in his Cause; declaring, That he could not admit him to his Communion before▪ Aurelius had admitted him to his; advising him, likewise, not to suffer the Apocryphal Books to be read in his Church; and Answers the Complaint that was made against St. Au∣gustin, for receiving into his Monastery, Persons of another Diocess, against the Canon of the Council of Carthage, that was held in the Year 401.

In the 65th Letter, St. Augustin acquaints Xantippus, Primate of Numidia, That he had given Judgment against Abundantius the Priest, who was convicted of staying, and eating upon a Fast-Day in the House of a Woman of ill Reputation. He saith farther, That he had admo∣nished him, and assured him, That according to the Canon of the Council of Carthage, in 401. he might, within the Year, have his Cause examin'd again: but he declares to Xantippus, That what Judgment soever, might intervene in his behalf, yet he would never trust him with a Church in his Jurisdiction. It is observed in that Letter, that Easter Day, in that Year, where∣in it was written, happen'd upon the 6th. of April, which is an infallible Proof, That this Let∣ter was written in the Year 402.

In the 66th. St. Augustin upbraideth Crispinus, a Donatist Bishop at Calama, because he Re-baptized those of Mappalia, whom with Threatnings, he had forced to embrace his Communi∣on. It appears by the Second Book against Petilianus, written in 402, that this happened not long before that same Year.

The 67th. and 68th. are Letters which St. Augustin, and St. Jerom writ to one another, in the Year 402.

In the 69th. both Alypius, and St. Augustin, exhort Castorius to fill up the Bishoprick of Va∣gae or Bagadia, which was then vacant by the Demission of his Brother Maximian; who, for Quietness sake, being obliged to quit the Bishoprick, had generously done it, as appears likewise by a Canon of the Council of Milevis, in the Year 402. which is the 88th. in the African Code.

The 71st. 72d. 73d. 74th. and 75th. of St. Augustin, to St. Jerom, and of St. Jerom, to St. Au∣gustin, are about that Dispute that was between them: Of which we gave an Account in the Abridgment of St. Jerom's Works.

The 76th. Is an Exhortation, in the Church's Name, to all Donatists, which contains the most prevailing Motives to make them return to the Church. It was written after the Dona∣tist Bishops had refused a Conference that was offered, in pursuance of the Order of the gene∣ral Council of Africa, in the Year 403.

The 77th. and 78th are concerning a Scandal that happened in the Church of Hippo. One Spes of St. Augustin's Monastery, had been accused of Uncleanness, by Boniface, a Priest. This Man charged the Crime upon the Priest; affirming, That he was the guilty Person. St. Au∣gustin finding no Proof to Convict either of them, remited the Judgment to God. But Sp••s desiring to come into the Clergy; and being denyed by St. Augustin, insisted, That if he might not be admitted, because he had been accused, neither was Boniface to continue in the Or∣der of Priesthood. St. Augustin thought fit to oblige them both, to go to the Grave of St. Felix of Nola, that God might be pleased to discover the Truth by some Miracle. Now he intended, that this should be kept Secret: but the Thing taking vent, St. Augustin wrote about it to the Clergy of Hippo, and to Two private Men, That none ought to be disturbed at the Scandals happening in the Church; That no Man should be rashly Condemned; That there was no

〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Condemned nor 〈◊〉〈◊〉 before 〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to let the Name of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be 〈…〉〈…〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 convenient, not to scandalize the 〈…〉〈…〉 but little to Boniface, not to have his 〈…〉〈…〉, if the Impurity of his Conscience did 〈…〉〈…〉.

〈…〉〈…〉 Priest, who is thought to be that Felix with whom St. Angustin 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 whom he challenges to Answer that Difficulty 〈…〉〈…〉 Fortunatus.

〈…〉〈…〉. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 him to explain more clearly than he had 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 How it may be known what that is which God •…•…th of us, since we are 〈…〉〈…〉 This was written in the Year 405.

The Eighty 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Complement, from St. Jerom to St. Augustin, concerning the Dispute that was betwixt them. He exhorts him to give over such Questions, and to ex∣ercise himself about the Scriptures.

The Fighty second, is the last of St. Augustin's Letters to St. Jerom, about their Contests. He insists especially upon 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Exposition of the Epistle to the Galatians; having de••••red,

That 〈◊〉〈◊〉 valued 〈◊〉〈◊〉 but Canonical Books so far, as to believe that the Authors of them were never deceived: And as for other Authors, how holy soever they might be, he doth not think▪ that what they say is a Rule to him, because they believed it to be true; out that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dependeth no further upon them, than the Reasons and Authorities of Canonical Books, which they lean upon, persuade him that their Assertions are conformable to Truth.

Having laid down this Principle, he proves, That St. Paul's correcting of St. Peter was serious: because St. Paul saith it in his Epistle to the Galatians; at the beginning of which, he declares, that he ly•••• not; and takes God to witness what he saith. He endeavours to answer St. Jerom's chief Reason, grounded upon this, That it is incredible, that St. Paul would reprove in St. Peter what he did himself, by showing that the Circumstances were very different. He maintains, That the Ceremonies of the Law being of themselves indifferent, neither good nor bad, the Use of them becomes good or bad, according to Times and Occasions: That they were neces∣sary to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, before. Christ came: That they signified, That he being come, it was not convenient immediately to forbid them, as Sacrilegious, and that it was sufficient to let them die, and go out of themselves; but that they were now neither to be looked upon nor practised. as necessary 〈◊〉〈◊〉 solvation: That St. Peter's Fearfulness having made him observe Legal Ceremo∣nies▪ in such Circumstances as might have persuaded others that he believed them necessary, St. Paul was in the right, to accuse him of not walking uprightly, according to the Truth of the Gospel, and to oblige the Gentiles to Judaize; whereas St. Paul could not be reproached with the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Fault, since he had kept them, only to shew that they were not to be con∣demned, as C•…•…inal Superstitions▪ And yet, That it is not now permitted to observe these Ceremonies, under any 〈◊〉〈◊〉, o•• for any purpose whatsoever, he does not examine the case of an officious Lye, and doth not decide whether it is permitted to tell a Lye at any time. He leaves to every Man to take what Side he pleases, provided that this be believed and laid down as an unalterable Principle, That there is no Lye in the Authors of the holy Scriptures. He sets St. Cyprian and St. Ambrose against the Authors that St. Jerom had alledged to justifie his Opi∣nion; but chiefly he citeth St. Paul against them, who saith and declares at the beginning of his Epistle, That he lyes not; and, That God is Witness of the Truth of what he affirms. He concludes his Argument with a Complement, and Expressions of the high Esteem and Respect that he had for St. Jerom: He approves of his Translations of the Scripture, pr•…•…sing withal some Objections concerning the Correction of the Hebrew Text, representing the difficulty of having his new Translation publickly read to People who were accustomed to that from the Septuagint, which was authorised by the Apostles themselves, who made use of it.

The Argument of the Eighty third Letter, as it is explained by the Translator, is this; The Men of Thiana having renounced the Donatists Schism, they wanted a Priest to govern them: One Honoratus was Chosen, and for that purpose taken out of the Monastery at Tagasta, and was Ordained Priest of Thiana. The Custom was, That those who enter'd into Monasteries, did begin with parting with all they had, for the benefit of the Poor, or of the Monastery it self: That if any offer'd to come in, that was not yet in a Condition to dispose of his Estate, they refused him not, provided he was sincerely resolved to execute the Order as soon as he could. Honoratus was in this Condition, and Owner of his Estate when he was Ordained Priest of Thiana. The Question was, Who should have this Estate? The Men of Thi•…•… pretended to have it by the Rule of those Times: That the Goods of such as were Ordained Priests of any Church, should be converted to the Use of that Church. Alypius, on the con∣trary, pretended, That Honoratus's Estate belonged to the Monastery of Tagasta; and was afraid, that if the Church of Thiana had it, and it were look'd upon as Honoratus's Estate, that Example would serve for a Pretence to those that should come into Monasteries, to deferr the parting with their Estates; wherefore his Opinion was, That at least they should divide it, and that the Church of Thiana should have but half. St. Augustin tells him, That he was not of that mind, but desireth him to Sign the Letter which he had written to the Church of Thiana; whereby he utterly renounced all Pretensions upon Honoratus's Estate; and he prof∣fers

to return Half of it to the Monastery of Tagasta, when any considerable Donation should be conferred upon the Monastery of Hippo. This Letter is placed in the Year 405.

In the Eighty fourth Letter, he excuses himself towards Novatus, (who is supposed to be the Bishop of Sitifi, that was present at the Conference in Carthage,) for detaining Lucillius the Deacon, his Brother, because he understood and spake the Punick Language well; the Use whereof being common at Sitifi, and not at Hippo, it was easie for Novatus to find a Church-man in those Parts, to Preach in that Tongue; whereas St. Augustin could not so readily meet with such a One in his Country. Thus is this Letter to be understood, as the Translator ob∣erveth, after a very Learned Man. It seems to belong to the same Year as the foregoing.

In the Eighty fifth, St. Augustin reproves Paul of Catagnae, for parting with his own Estate when he was made a Bishop, that he might abuse the Revenue of his Church, to live more at ease; telling him, That so long as he liveth thus, he will not communicate with him. In this Letter there is this excellent Advice; Non est Episcopatus artificium transigendae vitae falla••••••:

Episcopacy ought not to be look'd upon as an Establishment, or a Means to procure the deceitful Pleasures of this Life.

This Paul being dead before the Year 408. as is plain by the Ninety sixth Letter, this Letter must have been written about the Year 405.

In the Eighty sixth, he solliciteth Caecilian, Governor of Numidia, to restrain the Donatists about Hippo, as he had done in other Places under his Government. It was written after the Edict o Honorius, of the Year 403. before Caecilianus was created Praefectus Praetorio, in the Year 409.

In the Eighty seventh Letter, that was written about the same time, St. Augustin presses Eme∣ritus, a Donatist Bishop at Caesarea, to tell the Reasons which made him separate from the Church; and refuteth those which he used to alledge.

The Eighty eighth was written by St. Augustin, in the Name of the Clergy of Hippo, to Januarius, a Donatist Bishop, after the Donatists Deputies, that were sent in 406. to the Em∣perors, were rejected. It contains several Complaints against the Violences of some Donatist Clerks; and the authentick Acts of what happen'd in Constantine's time, concerning the busi∣ness of the Donatists. About the end of the Letter, they propose a Conference.

The Eighty ninth Letter, to Festus, is much upon the same Subject. St. Augustin begins, by justifying the Emperor's Edicts against the Donatists: Then he relates the Original of that Schism, and the Judgments whereby it was condemned. He proves, That the Donatists had no Grounds for their Separation, nor for Re-baptizing Catholicks. Lastly, He giveth Festus notice, That the People about Hippo still persisted in the Schism, notwithstanding his Letters, and continued their Violences.

The Ninetieth Letter is from an Heathen, one Nectarius, who interceded with St. Augustin for his Fellow-Citizens that dwelt at Calama, who had sacrificed to Idols, contrary to the Em∣peror's Inhibitions, and offered Violence to some Christians. The Reason that this Pagan uses to prevail with St. Augustin, is, That it is the Duty of a Bishop to do nothing but Good to Man∣kind: Not to meddle with their Affairs, unless it be to make them better, and to intercede with God to pardon their Faults. Baronius is of Opinion, That this Letter was written immediately after the Laws of 399. In the last Edition it is placed in the Year 408. and what is said there of the Laws newly published, is apply'd to the Law of the 24th. of November, 407. directed to Curtius; which is the 19th. of the 10th. Title of the 16th. Book of the Theodosian Code.

The next Letter is St. Augustin's Answer to Nectarius; whereby he exhorts him to turn Christian; promising, That though the Violences of those at Calama had proceeded very far, yet he would contribute, as much as the Interest of publick Security would permit, to have them treated gently. He owns and approves the Maxim which he alledged concern∣ing Episcopal Meekness; yet he asserts, That there must be Examples: The most guilty can∣not be spared: That Christians do not desire to see them punished out of Revenge, but Charity obligeth them to provide for the future; yet however, they do not desire the Death of those that abused them, they desire only their Conversion: And they are but little concerned for the Losses which they sustained, but they seek after their Souls. This is (saith he in the Conclusion of his Letter) what we are seeking with the Price of our Blood: This is that Harvest which we would make plentiful at Calama; or at least, that what happened in that place, might not hinder us to make it any where else.

In the Ninety second, to Italica, a Lady, he comforts her upon the Death of her Husband; telling her, That God cannot be seen, either in this World or in the next, with bodily Eyes. This Letter is before the Ninety ninth, directed to the same Lady, which is written in 408.

The Ninety third, to Vincentius, a Donatist Bishop, containeth several Reasons to show that Secular Authority, and the Severity of the Laws, may be used against Schismaticks, to oblige them to return into the Church. One of the chiefest, is, The Usefulness and the good Effects which the Terror of the Imperial Laws had produced, since they caused the Conversion of several whole Cities.

St. Augustin confesses. That this Reason affected him most; That by such Examples his Col∣legues brought him to their Opinions: That it was his Opinion formerly, That no Man ought to be forced: That Words only were to be used; for otherwise they could make none but counterfeit Catho∣licks: But that having withstood all Reasons, he finally yielded to Experience. That the Laws had brought back those that continued in the Schism, only by Interest, Fear, Negligence, or

other Considerations of the same Nature. Afterwards, he exhorts Vincentius to return to the Church; shewing, That the true Church is that which is spred throughout the Earth. He Answers what the Donatists objected, to prove that it might be comprehended within a small number of Righteous Men; He shews, That it must necessarily be mix'd with both bad and good; And at last, declares against Re-baptizing. This Letter was written about the Year 408.

The 94th. Letter, is by St. Paulinus Bishop of Nola; and the 95th. is St. Augustin's Answer to that of Paulinus. He discourseth of the Nature of Bodies after the Resurrection; and of that of Angels. It is incertain whether they have Bo•…•…s, or whether they are pure Spirits. These Letters are of the Year 408.

The 96th. Letter, is an Excellent Example; shewing, How little Bishops in St. Augustin's time, were given to Interest. Paulus Bishop of Catagnae, had bought an Estate in the Church's Name, with a Summ which he recovered; though he had Surrendered his own Estate for what he owed to the Royal Treasure. Boniface his Successor, not willing to benefit himself by that Fraud, declared the thing as it was; chusing either to have nothing, or to receive the whole from the Emperor's Liberality, rather than keep a thing gotten by Fraud. St. Augustin wri∣teth this Letter to Olympius, Surveyor of the Buildings, to obtain by his means this Gratification from the Emperour, in the behalf of Boniface. Olympius not being in that Employment before the Death of Stilico, which happen'd in August 408, this Letter cannot have been written till towards the latter end of that Year. To the same Magistrate, and at the same time, was the fol∣lowing written; whereby he prayeth him to see the Laws maintained that were Published in Africa, in the time of Stilico his Predecessor; and to let the Church's Enemies know, That these Laws having been Enacted freely by the Emperour himself, they were in full force after Sti∣lico's Death.

In the 98th. to Boniface, St. Augustin resolves a Question that was made to him by that Bishop, namely, How the Faith of Parents can serve for their Children that are admitted to Baptism, though the incredulity of Parents can be no Prejudice to their Children, when they offer them to Daemons. St. Augustin Answers, That it is most certain, that after a Child is born, he partakes no longer of other Men's Sins; but before, he is partaker of Adam's Sin, from which he is delivered by the Operation of the Holy Ghost in the Sacrament of Baptism. That Water represents outwardly, both the Mystery and Grace, but the Holy Spirit produces the Effect. That neither the Faith of Parents, nor yet of Godfathers is the cause of this Grace; but the Prayer of the whole Church, that begets Christ in each Member. In which sence, the God-fathers Answer for the Child, that he believes, and resolves to live Christianly, because he recei∣veth the Sacrament of Faith, and of Conversion to God. He explains this last Notion by seve∣ral Examples, and among the rest he alledgeth that of the Eucharist, saying,

That as the Sacrament of Christ's Body, is in some sort the Body of Christ; so the Sacrament of Faith is Faith it self; and in this sence it is said, That whosoever hath the Sacrament of Faith, hath Faith it self.

This Comparison would not be very Just, if St. Augustin did not consider something else in the Eucharist, besides the external and sensible part.

The 99th. is written to the Lady Italica, on the occasion of the first Siege of Rome, by Ala∣ricus in 408.

In the 100dth. Letter, St. Augustin intreateth Donatus, Proconsul of Africa, to restrain the Donatists; but not to punish them with Death. And having expressed himself with the most Pa∣thetical terms that can be used to oblige him to Meekness, he concludes with these curious words: It is a more troublesome than profitable Labour, to compel Men to forsake a great Evil, rather by Force, than by Instruction. This Letter was written at the time when they published new Edicts against the Donatists in 408.

The 101st. Letter to Memorius a Bishop, was joyn'd to the Sixth Book of his Treatise of Musick, which St. Augustin sent by it self to that Bishop, because he could not find his other Books upon the same Subject, that Memorius desired. This Memorius was Father to Julianus, who writ afterwards against St. Augustin, who was now a Deacon. St. Augustin gives him great Commendations in that Letter.

The 102d. is placed in the Retractations, amongst the Books composed before the Year 411. There St. Augustin answereth Six Questions proposed by an Heathen to a Priest called Deogratias.

The First is, concerning the Resurrection; Whether that which is promised to us, shall be like that of Jesus Christ, or like that of Lazarus; And whether after the Resurrection, Men shall be Subject to the Infirmities and Necessities of the Flesh. St. Augustin answereth, That our Resurrection shall be like that of Jesus Christ, and that after the Resurrection, we shall be freed from all cares and inconveniencies of corruptible Flesh.

The Second Question is, If none can be Saved but by Jesus Christ, what is become of those that died before his coming? What is become of so many Millions of Souls, against whom no∣thing can be objected, since Christ had not yet appeared among Men? Why did not the Saviour come sooner? Let it not be said, that the Jewish Law supplied that want; for there was already an infinite number of Men upon Earth, when it was given, and yet it was neither known, nor practised but in a small corner of the World.

St. Augustin having shewed, That the Pagans were not less perplexed, with that Question, than the Christians, answers, That Jesus Christ being the Word of God, who Governed the World from the beginning, all those that knew him, and lived according to his Precepts, might be saved by the Faith which they had, that he was in God, and should come upon the Earth. He adds, That Jesus Christ would not appear in the World, and cause his Doctrine to be Preached, but at such a time, and in such Places, where he knew, that there were those who should believe in him; and that he foresaw, that in all other Places, or at any other Times, Men would be such as they have been, though the Gospel had been Preached to them. This Notion was very favou∣rable to the Semipelagians, and they failed not to make use of it; as appears by Hilary's Let∣ter to St. Augustin. But this Father answered them in the 9 Chap. of the Book of the Predesti∣nation of the Saints; That he did make use of the Word Fore-knowledge only, because he thought it was sufficient to convince the Infidelity of the Pagans who made this Objection; and therefore he omitted to speak of that which is hid within God's Counsels of the Motives of that Dispensation: And so when he said, That Jesus Christ would not show himself, nor cause his Doctrine to be Preached but in those places, and at such a time, he knew those Persons liv'd, who should believe in him: It is as if he had said, That Jesus Christ did not show himself unto Men, nor suffer his Doctrine to be Preached, but in those places and at that time, when he knew, that those should live who were Elected before the Creation. He expounds again in the same place, what he had said in this Letter: That the Christian Religion never failed of being Preached to those that were worthy; and, that if it failed any, it was because they were not worthy of it. Saying, That he had not declared his Opinion concerning that which renders Men worthy, whether it is the Grace of Jesus Christ, or their own Will.

This is the Third Question: Why should they condemn Victims, Incense and Sacrifices, seeing that from the beginning God was honoured after this manner; and that he is represented as having need of the First-Fruits of the Earth?

Answ. God hath no need either of our Offerings, or our Sacrifices. The Service we yield to him turns to our own profit, and not to his. At all times Sacrifices have been offered to God, but they ought only to have been offered to the true God. The Sacrifices that are offered to Creatures are Sacrileges. Both the Sacrifices and the Sacraments of the Old Law are changed, and this Alteration was foretold. The New Testament is established upon the Sacrifice of the High-Priest; that is, upon the Effusion of the Blood of Christ himself; and now all Christians offer a Sacrifice that is suitable to the Manifestation of the New Covenant.

The Fourth Question is concerning the Eternity of Punishments; against which this Maxim of the Gospel was objected; With what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you. Every mea∣sure, say they, is limited to a certain space of time; What mean then those Threatnings of Eter∣nal Sufferings?

St. Augustin shews, That this Question is idle and unworthy of a Philosopher; That it is im∣pertinent to say that all measures are limited by a certain space of time, since there are other measures, besides those of time; That it is a common Saying, That a Man shall be dealt withal, as he dealeth with others, though he receiveth not precisely the same Treatment; That these words of Jesus Christ, It shall be measured unto you, after the same manner that ye measure unto others; signifie only, That Men shall be Punished or Rewarded, by the same Will which made them do Good or Evil to others; that is, by the remorse of their own Consciences; That Sins and Punishments are not measured by time, but by the quality of the Will; That the Punish∣ment of Sin is eternal; because, as the Sinner desired to enjoy Pleasure for ever, it is just that he should be Punished for it for ever.

The Fifth Question was not difficult to solve. It was supposed that Solomon had said, That there was no Son of God. St. Augustin answers, That Solomon never said it, but the contrary.

The Last, is a Serious Answer to the Jests of the Heathens, about the History of Jonas.

The 103d. Letter, is a second Letter of Nectarius of Calama, who reneweth the same Re∣quest that he made in the 90th. for Pardon of his Heathen Countrymen, who had misused the Christians.

The 104th. is an Answer of St. Augustin, where he particularly refuteth the Opinion of the Stoicks, concerning the Equality of Sins. St. Augustin received Nectarius his Letter upon the 27th. of March 409. and it is probable that he returned an Answer instantly.

The 105th. is an Exhortation to the Donatists. After he had justified the Severity of the Imperial Laws, he examines the ordinary Points of Controversie that were in dispute with those Schismaticks; Proving, 1. That the Validity of Baptism dependeth not upon the holiness of the Minister. 2. That the Catholick Church cannot be confin'd to the Donatists. 3. That the Wicked, who were tolerated in the Catholick Church, could not hinder it from being the true Church.

In the 106th. St. Augustin intreateth Macrobius, a Donatist Bishop at Hippo, not to Re-baptize a Sub-deacon that was gone over to their Party. St. Augustin gave this Letter to Maxi∣mus and Theodorus, who delivered it into Macrobius his own hands; who made them no Answer, but that he could not refuse to give the Faith to them that came to him; which Answer, they returned to this Saint by the 107th. Letter. St. Augustin immediately set Pen to Paper to reprove that behaviour of the Donatists, as he doth by the 108th Letter; wherein he proves, That Bap∣tism is not to be repeated, alledging chiefly the Example of the Donatists themselves, who

approved the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Maximianists, whom themselves had condemned and put out of their Communion. The time of this Dispute with Macrobius, is not very certain; yet it is supposed to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉〈◊〉.

The 1••9th. is a Letter of Complement written to St. Augustin by Severus Bishop of Milevis, wherein he ••••••••s of the Pleasure that he found in reading his Works. He gives him high Commen∣dations, especially for his love towards God and towards his Neighbour. St. Augustin answers him by the 110th, in a very modest and civil manner. The time of these Letters is not well known.

The 111th. is a Consolatory Epistle, to Victorianus the Priest, concerning those Miseries which the Barbarians, who then wasted both Italy and Spain in the Year 409. caused a great number of holy Persons and Virgins consecrated to God to Suffer.

In the 112th. Letter, St. Augustin exhorteth Donatus, who was leaving the Proconsulship, in 410, to renounce the Pomps of the World, and to follow Jesus Christ, and to bring back to the Communion of the Church, those that had any Dependency upon him.

The 113th. is a Letter of Recommendation to Cresconius, concerning Frumentius his Busi∣ness, who was taken out of the Sanctuary of a Church, whither he was fled to secure himself from the Pursuit of one of whom he Rented a Forest.

The Three following Letters are about the same Business. St. Augustin cites a Law that was made by Honorius the Emperor, the 21st. of January, 410. so that these Letters were written after that Year.

The 117th. is a Note from Dioscorus, to which he joins several Questions to St. Augustin, taken out of Cicero's Dialogues. St. Augustin Answers him in the next, That it is unworthy of a Bishop to spend time in explaining such kind of Questions. He treateth afterwards of the Design which Men ought to have in their Studies, and of the chiefest Good. He Rejects the Philosopher's Opinions upon that Subject; and shews, That God is the chiefest Good. He exhorteth Dioscorus to study Christian Philosophy, discovering the Blindness and the Errours of the Heathen Philosophers. St. Augustin speaking in this Letter of the Hereticks he was to Dis∣pute with, saith nothing of the Pelagians; which makes it probable, that it was written be∣fore the Year 411. but it could not be written long before, because he declares there, that he was growing Grey.

The 119th. containeth Consentius his Questions concerning the Mystery of the Trinity. And the 120th. containeth St. Augustin's Answers, who expounds the Faith, touching that Mystery. He treateth there of Faith, and Understanding.

The 121st. Letter is written by St. Paulinus, who proposes to St. Augustin some Questions upon certain Passages of the Psams, of St. Paul's Epistles, and the Gospels.

In the 122d. St. Augustin excuseth himself to his Clergy, and People, because he was obli∣ged to be absent. He exhorts them to diminish nothing of what they were wont to do for the Poor. This Letter was written in the Year 410. when Alaric took Rome. I suppose also, that St. Jerom hinted at the Calamity, in Aenigmatical Terms, in the following Letter, which is the last of the Second Classe of St. Augustin's Letters.

The Third Classe.

THE Letters of the Third Classe are all those that St. Augustin writ from the Year 411. to the end of his Life.

The First, which is the 124th. is directed to Albina, old Melania's Daughter, to Pinianus, and to the younger Melania, who had retired into Sicily, and from thence into Africa, after the Death of Rufinus, in the Year 411. and were come to Tagasta, when St. Augustin wrote this Letter; whereby he excuseth himself, that the Condition of the Church at Hippo, rather than the Severity of the Winter, hindred him from coming to them.

Pinianus being come to Hippo, to see St. Augustin, as he was celebrating the Holy Mysteries, the People demanded, that he should be ordained Priest, and obliged him to Swear, That he should not leave the Town of Hippo; and that, if he took Orders, he would be ordained no where, but at Hippo. Albina, and her Children, complained of that Violence; believing, that the Men of Hippo had no other Design in doing so, but to fix in their Church so Rich a Man as Pinianus was; pretending, that the Oath forced upon him was not binding. St. Au∣gustin writes to Alypius, the 125th. Letter, to justifie both himself, and his People, of the Su∣spicions entertained of him upon that Subject, praying Alypius to remove them. He speaketh afterwards of Pinianus his Oath, and of the Obligation to keep it; whereupon, he layeth down the following Principles about the Matter of Oaths. First, That none ought to Swear to a Thing forbidden, whatsoever Fear he may be in of Death if he Sweareth not; and that he ought rather to suffer Death. 2. That when a Man has Sworn, by constraint, to a lawful Thing, he is bound to Discharge it; and cannot dispense himself from it, without being guilty of Perjury. 3. That the Bond of an Oath is performed, not when we do what is signified by the Letter, or the Terms, wherein the Oath is expressed, but when we observe what the Imposer of the Oath expects, if it be known when the Oath is taken: and so a Man may be Perjured in keeping

what is signified by the Terms of the Oath, if he defeats the Expectation of him to whom the Oath is made; and that, on the contrary, this being done, there is no Perjury, though the Letter of the Oath is not observed in its proper Sence. From whence he concludes, That though Pinianus is not bound to abide at Hippo, as if that City were made a Prison for him; yet he is obliged, by his Oath, to dwell there as an Inhabitant, with Liberty to go and come, but not to go away never to return.

In the following Letter to Albina, St. Augustin justifies himself from the Accusation that was made against his People, for detaining Pinianus out of Covetousness. He saith, That such Imputations reflect upon him, because he is Administrator of the Church's Goods, where∣as the People neither disposes of, nor profits by them. Wherefore, to clear himself absolutely, he is obliged to make Oath, and to take God to witness, as he doth in this Letter, That the Administration of the Church's Goods is a Charge to him. He discourses again of the Va∣lidity of Pinianus his Oath, and of the Obligation he lay under to execute it.

The 127th. to Armentarius, and Paulina his Wife, was written soon after Rome was taken. He exhorts them not to regard this present Life; shewing also, how much they were obliged to keep the Vow of Continency, which they had made. This Letter is full of most Excellent Thoughts against the Love of the World, and of Life. Among other things, he particularly takes notice, That if, to prolong this Transitory Life, Men are not afraid to take so much Pains, to undergo so many Dangers, and Losses, much more ought they to expose themselves, for that Life which is Eternal: That all the Pains we take in this Life, to prevent Death, tend to nothing else but to keep us in Misery; that we constantly avoid the present Death; that we may be exposed to the Fear of all possible Ones. What (saith he) do not those Men endure, whom the Physicians force to endure, Fire, and the Knife; and, What is the Consequence of so many Pains? Is it to escape Death? No! but to die a little later. The Pains are certain, but the preserving of Life is uncertain; and very often the Patient dies in those Torments, to which he exposes himself for fear of Death; and chusing to suffer not to die, instead of chusing to die to pre∣vent suffering, it happens that they meet with Death in the midst of those Sufferings, which they chuse to undergo to avoid it▪ But the greatest Evil, and the most to be abhorred, is, That to lengthen this wretched Life a little, we displease God who is the spring of true Life.▪ Besides, tho' such a miserable Life, as this is, could continue for ever, yet were it not to be compared with an happy Life, tho' never so short. In the mean time, the love of this Life, as short as miserable, makes us lose a Life that is not only Happy, but Eternal; tho' in that very Life, which we so unhap∣pily love, we seek for nothing but what we may be secure of in the other, and which the love of this makes us lose. For what do we love, by loving a Life so wretched, and so short? It is not the mise∣ry of it, since we desire to be happy, nor the shortness of it, since we fear to see the end. We love it therefore, only because it is Life; and this alone, makes us love it, tho' short and miserable. From these Principles he concludes, That we should love nothing but eternal Life; shake off all Clogs, and Cares of present Things; cleave solely to Jesus Christ, to whom we should have our Recourse, as to the chief Physician, who alone is able to ease our Pains, and satisfie our Desires.

The 128th. Letter, is a Declaration of the Catholick Bishops to Marcellinus. The Empe∣ror's Commissioner, appointed to be at the Conference betwixt the Catholick Bishops, and the Donatists, by which Declaration they submit themselves to all the Conditions of the Order, given by Marcellinus; and give their consent, That in case the Donatist Bishops yield in the Conference, and be convicted of Schism, yet they should be maintained in their Dignity; so that in the Places, where there was a Bishop of each Communion, they should Govern joint∣ly, till the Death of the one; or that both should give up, and a Third be chosen: And, that though they granted this Advantage to the Donatists, yet they made no Conditions for themselves, but were contented to lose their Dignity, if the Donatists had the better in the Conference.

Marcellinus, by his Order, had appointed a certain Number of Bishops of each Party, to be at the Conference; but the Donatists desiring to be all there, made a Solemn Declaration. The Catholick Bishops gave their Consent by the 129th. Letter. The time of these Two last cannot be doubted, seeing they relate to the Conference at Carthage, appointed the 14th. of October, 410. and began the 1st of June, 411.

The 130th. is directed to the illustrious and pious Lady Proba Falconia, the Widow of Probus, Praefectus Praetorio, and Consul in 371. who withdrew into Africa after the taking of Rome. This Holy Widow having desired St. Augustin to write to her concerning Prayer, this Saint gives her, by this Letter, excellent Instructions about the manner how we ought to Pray, and the necessary Disposition to do it well. He discourses there of the Contempt of Riches, of renouncing the World, of that true Happiness which ought to be pray'd for, and of love of our Neighbour. He proves, That true Praying is from the Heart. He explains in few Words, the Lord's Prayer; shewing; That it contains what we are to Pray for. He observes that we may desire to be delivered from Pain, Sickness, and Afflictions; but that we are not to desire with impatience, nor to think that God regards us not, when we obtain not that ease which we desire. This Letter is full of very Christian and Sublime Maxims, and Notions, very useful for Pious Persons.

The 131st. to the same Lady, hath nothing Remarkable; he thanks her for enquiring after his Health.

In the 132d. Letter, St. Augustin exhorts Volusian, to whom it is written, to read the Scrip∣tures, and to propose to him those Difficulties which he shall meet with.

In the 133d. Letter, St. Augustin entreateth. Marcellinus not to punish those Donatists with Death, who had confessed their Crimes by Torture; and to have respect, in the Choice of Pu∣nishments, to that Meekness which the Church professeth to exercise towards all Men.

The next Letter contains the like Entreaties to the Proconsul, Apringius. Both these were written after the Imperial Law against the Donatists was enacted in 412.

By the 135th. Volusianus desires a Solution of the Difficulties proposed against the Christian Religion, which centred all in this Objection, How God should so humble himself as to become Man? With this Letter came another from Marcellinus, which is the 136th. wherein he desi∣reth St. Augustin, to answer the Questions made by Volusianus; adding some other Objections of the Enemies of the Christian Religion. They said, That God had abolished the Old Law, either out of Inconstancy, or because he was weary of it. That the Doctrine of the Gospel was contrary to States; and that the Christian Emperors had done great Dis-service to the Af∣fairs of the Common-wealth.

St. Augustin in the 137th. answereth Volusianus his Questions. He lays down this Rule at First, That though there are such Deep Things in the Scripture, that a Man may daily make new Discoveries, how Learned and Quick soever he be; yet it is not difficult to arrive to the Knowledge of what is necessary to be known to be Saved. Afterward, he answereth Volusianus his Question concerning the Incarnation; shewing, That though the Word was made Man; yet he did not give over the Care of Things upon Earth, nor ceased to be every where, and to Govern all Things: That the Union of the Soul with the Body, which daily happeneth, is not less difficult to be comprehended than that of God with Man; which happened but once to save Men from their Sins. Here he lays down very powerful Arguments, to perswade Men to believe the Incarnation of Jesus Christ; as, The Original of the People of Israel; God's Deal∣ings with them; his chusing them to be his beloved People; the Laws and Ceremonies of the Old Testament, which had all a relation to Jesus Christ; the Predictions of the Prophets; the Life, Actions, and the Death of Christ; the Establishment of the Church; its Encrease, and Preservation; the greatness and sublimity of the Morals that were taught in it; the plain Stile of the Scripture, which makes it accessable to all Mankind, though there are such Depths, as few Minds can penetrate, and other such Considerations which are sufficient to prove the Truth of the Christian Religion.

In the following Letter, St. Augustin replies to the Objections made by Marcellinus: The First is about the Alteration of the Old Law, which they imputed either to Envy, or to In∣constancy in God. St. Augustin saith, That God is unchangeable in all that concerns himself; and, that as he hath given Precepts, and Ordinances for the Good of Man, so it is for the same End that he sometimes changeth them; as he judgeth it may be more conveni∣ent for them.

The Second Objection, proposed by Marcellinus, seems more difficult. They accused Christ's Doctrine, as inconsistent with the Well-being of the State; because it forbids rendring Evil for Evil; Commands turning the other Cheek; giving the Cloak also to them that offer to take our Coats; and to go Two Miles with him that forceth us to go one. These Precepts say they, are contrary to the Practice of Common-wealths: For who is he that will suffer his Enemy to take away his Goods? Who doth not seek to return Evil for Evil to Barbarians, who come to lay the Provinces of the Empire waste?

St. Augustin refutes this Objection; showing, that this Maxim here looked upon as contra∣ry to the good of the State, was a Maxim of the Old Romans, who thought it worthy of their Greatness, and profitable for the Common-wealth to forgive Injuries: That Cicero exal∣ting Caesar for a great Prince, commendeth him for his readiness to forgive Injuries: That such Things are read with Admiration in Profane Writings, whilst they are despised in Christian Books, where they are more Plainly, and more nobly expressed. He proves afterwards, That these Divine Books are so far from being contrary to the Happiness of Governments, that they are most proper to maintain Peace and Concord: That however, they are not to be under¦stood literally; and that we are not absolutely forbidden to defend our selves, or to punish Crimes; but only, that Men should not act by a Principle of Revenge, but with a Design to do good to him that offends us: So that these Precepts of Jesus Christ, have respect to the Dis∣position of the Heart, rather than to what is done outwardly, and tend only but to preserve Patience, and Charity in their Hearts, leaving us the Liberty to do what we think may con∣duce most to the Advantage of those to whom we desire to do Good.

Having alledged both Christ's and St. Paul's Example, to justifie such a Carriage; he adds, That this hinders not the Execution of Justice against Evil Doers, provided it be done with a Spirit of Charity: That War it self may be managed with the same Spirit, when Men desire to Conquer, with a Design to do Good to the Vanquished, and keep them from doing Hurt. Then he answereth Marcellinus's last Objection; shewing, That the Christian Emperors ought not to be charged with the decay of the Empire; the Heathen themselves having confessed, that their own Manners, and the Vices of the Romans, were the main Causes of it. He

sheweth, likewise, how Contemptible the Juglings of Apollonius, and Apuleius were, in com∣parison of the Miracles of Christ, and his Apostles.

The 139th. Letter is likewise directed to the same Marcellinus, but upon another Subject. He speaks of Publishing the Acts of the Conference at Carthage: He earnestly conjures him to hinder the Donatists, that were cast into Prison, from being put to Death. He mentions his Books of Baptism; His Abridgment of the Conference of Carthage; A Letter to the Donatists; Two foregoing Letters; and that which follows, directed to Honoratus: Whereby it appears, that all these Discourses belong to the Year 412.

The 140th. Letter, is this just now mentioned, directed to Honoratus, and written concern∣ing Five Questions. He treats of Grace, of the New Covenant, and of the Design of Christ's Incarnation. He observes, at first, that every Man hath a Soul endued with Reason; but very different Uses are made of it. Some use their Reason with no other prospect but to please their Senses; others on the contrary, seek after those good things which concern their Soul, and which are of a Nature above their own. The Soul may make a good use of Temporal Happi∣ness, but that is only when it is apply'd to the Service of the Creator: for all Substances being good in their Nature; it is a good thing to use them in order, and not thereby to oppose the Order of the Creator: And the ill use which Men make of good things, doth not hinder the good use, which God knows how to make, even of evil ones. For his Justice by Punishing, brings into order those whose Injustice put them out of order by Sin. God granted this Tem∣poral Felicity in the Old Covenant, which neither promised, nor afforded any but Temporal Advantages; but at the same time he revealed the New Covenant, whereof the Old was but a Figure; Tho' but a small number of Saints have taken notice of it, and even these, though Ministers of the Old Covenant, belong'd to the New. But in the fulness of time, the Word of God was united with Man to be a Light to the Nations, and those that received it, became the Children of God, not Children by Nature as Jesus Christ is, but Children by Adoption and Grace. It is he that taught us to despise the things of this Life, and to value none but those which we shall enjoy in the other. This is the Oeconomy of the New Covenant, which St. Augustin explains at large in this Letter. He proveth it by the Exposition of the 22d. Psalm, which begins with these words, My God, my God, why hast thou for saken me? Which was the Subject of Honoratus's first Question. He insists chiefly upon shewing, That Christians ought not to put their Trust and Confidence in the good things of this World; but to love and seek after that only which concerns the next. This is almost the sole design of this Letter, to justifie that the love of Spi∣ritual and Eternal Blessings is the only aim of the New Covenant; To the same purpose he expounds also the beginning of St. John's Gospel; the Parable of the ten Wise and ten Foolish Virgins; these words of St. Paul, Eph. 3. I pray God that being firmly settled, rooted and grounded in love, you may be able to comprehend with all Saints, what is the breadth, and length, and heighth, and depth; and what is said in the Gospel concerning utter Darkness, which were the Subject of Honoratus's five Questions. This Man was but a Catechumen, and yet St. Augustin sets before him the most sublime and the highest things of the Christian Religion; and yet when he speaks of the Eucharist, he doth not clearly explain it; but only tells him, That he shall know after Baptism, in what time, and after what manner it is offered: But he declareth plainly enough what he believed concerning the Eucharist, saying, That Proud Men who come to the Lord's Table, do indeed receive his Body and Blood, and adore it, but they are not fed therewith; because they imitate him not, and though they eat it, yet they refuse to become poor as he was. At the latter end of his Letter, he speaketh against those who put their Confidence in their own Strength, and not in the Grace of Jesus Christ. This is in short what St. Augustin treats of in this Letter, which may be looked upon as a Treatise, as he says himself in the Conclusion, and in his Retractations; where he places it amongst his entire Discourses.

The 141st. is a Synodical Epistle of an Assembly of Catholick Bishops held at Cirta, directed to all the Donatists, whereby they are exhorted to return into the Church; Their Bishops having been so solemnly confounded and convicted in the Conference at Carthage, of which he gives a short Abridgment in that Letter. It bears Date the 14th. of June 412.

The next Letter to Saturninus, Euphratus, and the Clergy newly returned into the Unity of the Church, is of the same time. St. Augustin Congratulates their re-union, endeavours to con∣firm them in the good Resolution they had taken, and exhorts them to discharge their Ministery faithfully.

In the 143d. Letter, St. Augustin answereth a Question proposed to him by Marcellinus, to whom it is written: namely, where the Magicians of Egypt could find VVater to turn into Blood, when Moses had turned all the VVater that was there already. He saith, That this Question may be answered two ways; either by saying, That they took Water out of the Sea; or, by supposing, That the Plagues of Egypt had their Effect only where Egyptians were, but not where the Children of Israel dwe••t. Having thus dis-entangled himself of the Question, he explains some Passages of his Books concerning Free-Will, and the Original of Souls. He con∣fesses, That his Writings having been written with Precipitation, some faults could not but creep in. He sincerely acknowledgeth, That even in Writing he perceived faults, and that he corrects and reproves them, being far from hiding or defending them. He saith, That he is not like those, who through excessive love of themselves, and to cover their own Errors, would leave others in theirs; That he would not have his best Friends to say, That he was not mistaken.

He wisely observeth, That none ought to approve the Commendation given by Cicero to one, That he never uttered one word which he wished afterwards he had not spoken. This says he, belongeth to a Mad man, rather than to a Wise man; This cannot be applied but to Divine Persons, by whom the Holy Ghost hath spoken. He confesses, That he is still uncertain con∣cerning the Origin of our Souls; because neither Scripture nor Reason have determined the Point. He further saith, That Scripture and Reason cannot be contrary to one another; That if Reason seems to be contrary to the Scripture, it is a false Light, it is not right Reason. That if what is drawn from Scripture, is found directly opposed to clear Reason; there must be a mis-understanding of the Scripture. Lastly, He refutes Volusianus, who would hardly believe what he had writ to him, that the Blessed Virgin could conceive Jesus Christ, and remain a Virgin still: This Letter is of the Year 412. for it is written after the 139th. and there St. Augustin Answers a Letter of Marcellinus, brought by Boniface, who was with Marcellinus when St. Au∣gustin writ the 139th. Letter.

In the 144th. Letter, St. Augustin Congratulates the Men of Cirta, who returned to the Church exhorting them to give God thanks for it, as being the effect of his Mercy. He saith, That the Change of those who quit a Debauched Life to lead a better, without giving up themselves to God; as that of Polemon was, ought however to be look'd upon as God's Work. For, saith he, nothing but the heighth of Pride and of Ingratitude, can imagine that the Beauty of the Body, Strength, and Health are God's Gifts; and that Chastity, which makes the Beauty of the Soul, can be the work of Man. Whence he concludes, That the Conversion of those to whom he writ, is much the rather the Work of God's Mercy. He exhorts them to acknowledge it. To God, saith he, you are to give Thanks; fear him if you will be kept from falling, love him if you intend to go forward. DEUM TIMETE NE DEFICIATIS, AMATE UT PROFICIATIS. This Letter was written after the Conference at Carthage.

The 145th. to Anastasius comprehendeth most of St. Augustin's Principles of Justification, for having observed that the World is more to be feared when it fawns upon us, than when it torments us, he layeth down these following Principles, 1. That the love of earthly Goods cannot be totally laid aside in this Life, and it will always have a share in our best Actions. 2. That the Will of Man cannot be called Free, without the assistance of Grace. 3. That the Law serveth to make us know our Impotency, that we may have our recourse to Grace. That Sin is not overcome whil'st Men forbear it meerly for fear of Punishment. For, saith he, though Men go not so far as to the outward Action, yet the secret Desire of doing Evil, in the heart, which is restrained only by the fear of Punishment, is a Tyrant that keeps us in Slavery, And thus it may be said, That whosoever abstaineth from Sin, only for the dread of Suffering, is not altogether an Enemy to Sin; because he is not perfectly in love with Righteousness; and that Sin is not properly hated, but proportionably as Righteousness is loved. INIMICUS ERGO EST JUSTI∣TIAE QUI POENAE TIMORE NON PECCAT▪ TANTUM POR∣RO QUISQUE PECCATUM ODIT, QUANTUM JUSTITIAM DILIGIT. 5. That the love of Righteousness ought to go further than the love of Sin; because it should proceed so far as that all the Mischief which can thereby befall our Bodies, may not hinder us from practising our Duty; and so nothing may separate us from the love of Jesus Christ, and Righteousness. 6. It is the Holy Ghost who poureth that Charity into our Hearts; we have it not of our selves, and when we find our selves destitute of it, we must, Ask, Seek, and Knock; addressing our selves to God by Prayer. This Letter was written about the time that the Pelagian Herefie began to be known in Africa, in 413.

The following, which is a Letter of Thanks to Pelagius, is likewise about the same time, as St. Augustin observes in the 26th. Chap. of the Book of the Acts of Pelagius. He having already heard that this Man opposed the Grace of Jesus Christ, he hints at some thing of it in this Letter; wishing, That God would give him such Grace as might make him good always; praying him, That he would beg of God to make him such, as he believed him to be already; adding in the end of the Letter, I pray God, my Dear Brother, that he would be pleased to make you accepta∣ble in his sight.

St. Augustin in his Retractations, mentions the two following Letters; The 147th. to Pauli••••, and the 148th. to Fortunatianus Bishop of Sicca, and placeth them after the Books composed in 412. And indeed, this Bishop of Sicca, who was at the Conference of Carthage, died in 413. and Urbanus succeeded him, and was deputed that very Year to go to Rome. St. Augustin proves in both those Letters, That God cannot be seen with bodily Eyes. In the former, he explains, What it is to see God; How he is seen; Who they are that have seen him; and, Who shall see him hereafter.

The 149th. is an Answer of St. Augustin, to the Questions proposed by St. Paulinus, in the 121st. Letter, about some Passages of Scripture; He critically examines the Difficulties that were raised about St. Paul's Epistles, and gives a Rational Account of them. This Letter was written about the Year 414. after the Promotion of Urbanus to the Bishoprick of Sicca.

The 150th. is written to Proba, and to her Daughter Juliana; He wishes them joy, That Demetrias, Juliana's Daughter, had consecrated her self to God in vowing Virginity. It is full of noble Expressions, in Commendation of Vi••ginity.

Count Marcellinus, who presided at the Conference of Carthage, was Executed in the Year 413. at Carthage, with his Brother Apringius, by order of Count Marinus, being Accused of

abetting Heraclianus his Rebellion: St. Augustin being his Friend, and knowing his Innocency, used all his Endeavours to hinder that Judgment; and was sensibly affected for the Death of those innocent Persons. A great Lord, one Caecilian, St. Augustin's Friend, and an Enemy to the two Brothers, being at Carthage the same time when this Judgment was given, was suspected to have had a hand in it; and St. Augustin having forborn writing to him for some time, this Lord thought that he had also conceived the same Suspicion; wherefore he wrote to St. Augustin about it. To this Letter St. Augustin returns an Answer in the 151st. wherein he represents, both the Cruelty and Injustice of Marinus's Judgment, and what had made the World believe that Caecilian had a hand in it. Yet he professes not to believe it, considering what he had written to justifie himself; but he exhorts him to renounce all manner of Friendship with Marinus. After∣wards he makes a Panegyrick upon these two Brethren without naming them, and particularly of Marcellinus; giving an Account of the edifying Discourses he made in the Prison: This is a remarkable thing. St. Augustin declares, That having been to visit him in the Prison, he deman∣ded of him, whether he had ever committed any Sin for which he ought to have done Penance; and that Marcellinus made him this Answer, That he took to witness those Sacraments which that hand brought him, that neither before nor after Marriage, he ever touch'd any Woman, but his own Wife. This Passage teaches us, That Pastors were careful to visit Prisoners, to assist, and carry the Sacraments to them, and enjoyned them Penance when they found them guilty of great Sins; and there is no doubt, but that after Penance they also gave them Absolution, when they feared that they should be Condemned to Die; but upon condition, that if they escaped Death they should fulfil their Penance. At last, St. Augustin sets Marcellinus his Innocence against the Cruelty and unworthiness of Marinus's Action, whom he describes as a very ill man, who had Sacrificed those two innocent Persons to please the Donatists. He again advises Caecilian to abhorr that Action, and to conceive such an Indignation against him that committed it, as might oblige him to a Penance proportionable to the greatness of his Crime. At last, he tells him, That being of such an Age, and of such Probity, he ought no longer to continue a Catechumen. Marcellinus, who had been so barbarously used by Marinus, was justified at Court. St. Au∣gustin saith, That there was not so much as need of a Pardon from the Emperor, and had not Marinus hastned the Judgment against Marcellinus, without waiting for the Bishop's Answer, who was sent to the Emperor to sollicit his Pardon, he had been acquitted; and accordingly, Ma∣rinus was disgraced, and the Memory of Marcellinus honoured by the Emperor Honorius, who by a Law of the Third of August 414. Registred in the Theodosian Code, B. 16. Tit. 5. L. 55. confirms all that he had done against the Donatists, and gives him the Title of Marcellinus of Glorious Memory.

The 152d. Letter is from Macedonius, Lieutenant of Africa, who desires to know of St. Augustin, whether Religion permits Bishops to make Applications to Judges to obtain favour for Enemies, as they did at that time, and as St. Augustin often did of Macedonius. This Magistrate could hardly believe that Religion authorized that Practice; Seeing that God doth so severely forbid Sin, that a Man is not admitted to Penance after the first time; and that it seems to be a countenancing of Crimes when we show an unwillingness to have them punished.

St. Augustin in the 153d. Letter, answereth, That Bishops intercede for Criminals, be∣cause they hope they may amend: They abhorr the Crime, but they pity the Criminals: That Repentance having no place but in this Life, there is reason to intercede for the Guilty, lest by this finite Punishment which ends their life, they may fall into a Punishment that shall never end. So that none can doubt but that Religion approveth that Practice, since God himself, in whom is no Injustice; who seeth what every Man is, and what he ought to be, and cannot be mi∣staken in his Judgments, causeth his Sun to rise upon the bad as well as upon the good, and by his long forbearance invites Sinners to Repentance. That when Bishops by their Intercessions, have rescued any from the severity of the Judges, they put him to do Penance, that the Crime may not remain unpunished. For, saith he, a true Penitent hath no other prospect, than that the Evil which he hath done may be punished. That if there be any Persons whose Malice is so great, that after Penance, and being reconciled and admitted to the Holy Mysteries, they relapse into their Disorders, and sometimes into greater; then indeed, the Church admits them no more to do Penance, lest a Remedy, (which is so much the more profitable, that it is least exposed to the contempt of Sinners) should lose its Virtue, if it become more common: But yet, we despair not, of their Salvation, which they may obtain through God's Mercy, by being converted and altering their Life. Afterwards, St. Augustin alledgeth several Reasons in Equity, and several Examples, to shew, That we are not forbidden to intercede for Criminals; and that all Men ought to be inclined to Meekness and Pity. The principal Consideration which he makes use of, is the State of Man in this Life, which cannot be without Sin. For, saith he, Though the Sins which we commit, after the general abolishment in Baptism, are not of the same quality with those for which Men are separated from the Altar; yet they must be expiated, not by a barren Sorrow, but by a Sacrifice of the Works of Mercy.

St. Augustin acknowledgeth, That the Soveraign Power of Princes; the Power of Life and Death, and the dread of Punishments, are all necessary to restrain Wicked Men, and the Terror which these things strike into the Hearts of Men, is of great advantage, not only to the good, who by this means live securely among the wicked, but even to the wicked themselves; because whil'st their Hands are tied by the fear of Punishment, their Hearts may call upon God, and turn

from Evil to Good: For (saith he) they are not good Men, because they abstain from Evil through fear of Suffering; for Fear does not make Men Good, but only the Love of Righteousness.

He tells us further, That upon some occasions, it is Mercy to Punish; and in others, Cruelty to Forgive: Sicut enim est aliquando misericordia puniens, ita est crudelitas parcens. He speaketh at last, of Restoring Stoin Goods, or such as are ill gotten: And concerning these, he saith, (1.) That it is a Mockery, not to do Penance; not to restore, when it is in our power, the Goods that are gotten by those Crimes for which we pretend to do Penance. (2.) That though a Judge may, without Injustice, appoint Punishments to oblige a Thief to make Restitu∣tion; yet one may intercede for him, not to prevent restoring what is taken away, since we bind them to it by the dread of God's Judgments, and debarr them from the Communion till they have done it; but only by way of preventing unnecessary Cruelty against a Man that is supposed not to be in a capacity of making Restitution, or not fully convicted of the Theft. (3.) That when we have not evident Proofs that such a one is possessed of our Goods, it is better to hazard losing them, though perhaps he is guilty, but denies it, than to torment and put him to Death, per∣haps unjustly, if he hath them not. An excellent Caveat to teach Masters not to be too for∣ward to seize upon their Servants, merely upon Suspicion. (4.) That Lawyers may take Money for their Advice in a just Cause, but not Judges to do Justice, nor Witnesses to give Testimony to Truth: and that both are exceedingly guilty when they take Money; the one for an Unjust Sentence, and the other for a False Witness. (5.) That Lawyers having taken Money ••o defend an ill Cause, or to blind the Judge, are obliged to make Restitution, as well as the Witnesses or Officers, who exact Fees beyond what belong to their Places. (6.) That Estates gotten by Stealth, False Accusation, or Oppression, ought to be restored; and that it is not enough, to bestow them upon the Poor. (7.) That in some sence it may be said, That wicked Men have Nothing, but that All things belong to the Faithful.

For (saith St. Augustin) whatsoever we have which we have no Right to, belongs to another, and we have Right to nothing but what we justly possess; and we possess nothing justly, but what we possess as we ought: and all that we possess not as we ought, is another's; and we possess nothing as we ought, if we make not good use of it▪ So that wicked Men never possess any thing as they ought; and good Men enjoy it so much the more justly, because they love it less.

Strange Conse∣quences would follow from this Position, had not St. Augustin added this Restriction imme∣diately;

But their Iniquity is tolerated, who possess not this World's Goods as they ought; yea, Laws are established to secure their Possession; and are called Civil Laws, because that by them Civil Society is preserved; not by obliging them to use those Goods as they ought, but by preventing their abusing them for the Oppression of others.... Yet we have respect to these Humane and Temporal Laws; and our Intercessions never go so far, as to hinder the restoring of what is ill gotten, according to the Laws.

The 154th. Letter is from Macedonius; who sendeth St. Augustin word, That he had done what he desired; and, That he had read the Three First Books of The City of God, which St. Au∣gustin sent him.

St. Augustin answers him in the 155th. wherein he discourses of Happiness; shewing, That God is the Spring of a happy Life, and that true Vertue consists in the Love of God:

Vertue (saith he) is nothing else but the love of what ought to be loved: To know how to make a good Choice, is called Prudence; not to be turned away from it, for any Evil, by Pleasure or Pride, is called Fortitude, Temperance and Justice. Thus God is the chiefest Good: so that to love any other thing more, or as much as him, is not to love our selves; for our Condition is so much the more happy, as we approach with greater violence towards that which is best.

These four Letters were written immediately after St. Augustin had composed his three first Books of The City of God; which were compleated in 413. before the Fourth and the Fifth, which were published in 415.

The 156th. Letter was written from Syracuse, by one Hilary; who desireth St. Augustin to let him know what he should think of certain Propositions, set forth by some at Syracuse; That

it is in Man's power to keep himself pure from all Sin; That it is easie for him, if he please, to keep the Commands of God; That Men are born without Sin, and by consequence, that it is inconsistent with the Justice of God, that Children dying before Baptism, should perish; That rich Men cannot enter into the Kingdom of God, without renouncing their Riches, and selling all they have, and giving it to the Poor; And that whil'st they keep them, all the good Works they may do, according to God's Law, will profit them nothing: And lastly, That we ought to Swear in no case.

He asketh further, Whether the Church withoutspot or wrinkle, spoken of by St. Paul, is that to which we now belong, or that which we hope to make up one day with the blessed in Heaven. This Hilary, of Syracuse, is very like that Hilary who joined with St. Prosper to refute the Semi-Pelagians, and who writ to St. Augustin the 226th. Letter; both were Lay-men, since St. Augustin calleth them Sons: They were both great Enemies of the Pelagians, Disciples and great Admirers of St. Augustin: The Style of both Letters seems to be the same, which makes it probable that they were both written by the same Person.

Be that as it will, in the next St. Augustin answereth the Questions proposed in this Letter; which gave him opportunity to treat at large of Original Sin; Of the Corruption of our Na∣ture;

Of Justification, and of the Grace of Jesus Christ: And to prove against the Pelagians, (1.) That no Man can be free from Sin in this Life. (2) That no Man can fulfil the Law without the Grace of Jesus Christ, which is obtained by Labour and by Prayer. (3.) That Grace doth not take away Liberty; because the Will of Man is by so much the more free, as it is the more subject to Christ's Grace, and delivered from the Dominion of Sin: We should not think that Free-Will is destroy'd, because it needeth such Helps; on the contrary, it supposes that it subsists still, when we say that it hath need of help. (4.) That we learn of St. Paul, That all the Children of Adam are born in sin; and perish eternally, if they are not sanctified by the Grace of Baptism. Here he refuteth the Pelagians very fully; who answered, That Sin was not from Adam, but by Imitation: And he enlargeth upon the Opposition which St. Paul makes between Adam and Jesus Christ; between the Condemnation caused by the Old Man because of Sin, and the Justification which the New Man worketh in us by his Grace. Having handled these Points, he speaks occasionally against Coelestius, who had been both accused and convicted of those Errors which St. Augustin had lately refuted. Afterwards this Saint discourses against another Pelagian Error concerning Manners; and proveth, (1.) That to be saved, Men need not part with their whole Estate, and reduce themselves to entire Poverty. And lastly, he observes, That the Church here below consists both of Good and Bad. He adds further, concerning Swearing, That Men should avoid Swearing as much as possibly they can: That it is best, not to Swear at all; no, not in Truth; because those that are used to Swearing, are every moment upon the brink of Perjury: That it is a most dangerous thing to play with Oaths; but the surest way, is, never to Swear, and use only Yea and Nay. St. Jerom mentions this Letter in his Dialogue, written in the Year 415. and speaks of it as a Discourse newly pub∣lished. It was read in the Council of Palaestine, assembled in July, 415. as St. Augustin ob∣serves in the Book of The Acts of Pelagius, chap. 11. which shews that it was written in the Year 414.

The Subject of the 158th. Letter is as followeth; Evodius, Bishop of Uzala, having given an Account of a Young Man's happy Death, who had led a most holy Life, and had appear'd to some after his Death; proposes some Questions to St. Augustin about such Apparitions, and asks, Whether the Soul hath not a Body after Death? We ought not to forget that this Bishop, speaking of that Young Man's Death, observes, That in his Sickness he repeated Psalms, and in his Agony he made the Sign of the Cross upon his Forehead: That they buried him honourably, and for Three Days together Hymns were sung upon his Grave, and on the Third Day they offer'd the Sacrifice of our Redemption. At the latter end of this Letter, Evodius asks St. Augustin some other Questions about the difference betwixt God's and Man's Wisdom.

St. Augustin answers that Bishop in the 159th. and tells him, That this Question requireth much Labour and Study to resolve all the Difficulties that may be in it. But to let him know his Opinion in one word, He did not believe that the Soul did go out of the Body with a Body: That as to Visions and Apparitions, nothing can be said, without deciding after what manner an infinite number of different Idea's are raised in our Souls: which is a thing very hard to be comprehended; though it is certain, that such Representations are neither Corporeal Mo∣tions, nor Corporeal Qualities. He referrs Evodius to what he had said concerning that Matter, in his Book upon Genesis; and contents himself to tell him what happened to Gennadius, a Phy∣sician at Carthage; who doubting whether there was another Life, was convinced of it by a Young Man that appeared to him in a Dream; and made him apprehend, that since he did both hear and see him, though his Eyes were shut, and had no use of his Ears, that even so after Death, though he should have no bodily Eyes, yet he should see, and feel, and live.

The 160th. and 161st. are both by Evodius. In the first, he asketh St. Augustin what God is? and what is Reason? And in the Second, he desireth him to explain a Passage in his 137th. Let∣ter to Volusianus.

St. Augustin answereth both by the 162d. Wherein he tells Evodius, That he had not Time enough to answer those Questions, but he had already resolved several of them, in his Books of the Trinity; Of Free-Will; Of the Quantity of the Soul; and, Of True Religion. He confirms what he had said in the 159th. Letter, touching a Soul separated from the Body; and about Apparitions. And at last justifieth what he had said of the Incarnation to Volusianus; If a Reason could be given of that Mystery, then would it cease to be Wonderful: Were there an Example of it, it would not be Singular.

Though St. Augustin had signified to Evodius, That he was not at leisure to answer such sort of Questions; yet this Man proposes two more in his 163d. Letter: The former, concern∣ing the Original of Christ's Soul; and the other, about a difficult Passage in St. Peter's Epistle, where it is said, That Jesus Christ preached in the Spirit to the Spirits in Prison; which some time were disobedient, when the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah.

St. Augustin resolveth both these Questions in the 164th. Letter: And beginning with the latter, he saith, (1.) That no Man can doubt of Christ's Descent into Hell. (2.) That he did not deliver all Men from thence, but only such as he judged worthy to be delivered. (3) That almost the whole Church believes that Jesus Christ delivered our First Father; and some others think, That he brought out the other Patriarchs and the Prophets: But that it is more probable that these righteous Men were not in Hell, but in another Place, called Abraham's Bosom. (4) That

those just Men who were raised again when Christ died, did take again their Bodies to die a second time. (5.) In cannot be said, That Jesus Christ preached the Gospel in the other World, to those that were Incredulous in this Life. (6.) That that Passage of St. Peter, is not to be understood of the Spirits or Souls detained in Hell; but of the Spirits who lived in the days of Noah, whom the Word did then enlighten: So that St. Peter's meaning, in St. Augustin's Opi∣nion, is not, that Christ descended into Hell, to preach the Gospel to those who believed not, in Noah's time; but that Jesus Christ dying for us, was raised again by the same Spirit by whom he formerly preached, or by which he formerly instructed Unbelievers, in the days when Noah prepared the Ark, whil'st God's Patience waited and invited them to Repentance. (7.) That Christ's Birth was not defiled with Sin; and though he took in the Womb of a Virgin true Humane Flesh, yet was it not sinful Flesh, because Lust had no hand in forming of that Flesh. This brings him insensibly to the other Question, about the Original of the Soul. St. Augustin is still to seek about that Subject, and dareth not declare for any of the four Opinions that di∣vided the Christians at that time, but clearly disowns the Notion, That for the Punishment of some Sins committed in another Life, the Soul is cast into the Body, as into a Prison: But maintains, That it is certain that Christ's Soul was not subject either to the Death of Sin, or to Condemnation. All these Letters of Evodius, and these Answers of St. Augustin, were written not long after one another, after that to Volusianus, in the Year 414.

The 165th. is a Letter of St. Jerom to Marcellinus and Anapsychia: Wherein this Father having related the several Opinions about the Origination of the Soul, adviseth them to address themselves to St. Augustin, if they desired to know more. It is visible, that this was written before the former; because it is directed to Count Marcellinus, who was executed in 413. but it is placed here, because of its relation with the following Letter of St. Augustin, which is a Treatise upon the Soul's Original, dedicated to St. Jerom, and sent to him by Orosius, in the Year 415.

St. Augustin having observed, That the Soul cannot be called a Body, if by Body be under∣stood an extended Substance; though it might be termed Corporeal in another sence, if this Term be taken at large to signifie Substance in general: he proposes then to St. Jerom the several Opinions concerning the Soul's Original; starting some Difficulties upon that which St. Jerom seemed to approve best; yet it is that which we now hold, That Souls are created and put into our Bodies at the Birth of each Person. He insists particularly upon this, That it is difficult to make that consist with Original Sin, and with what the Church believes concerning Children that die without Baptism; and so he asketh of St. Jerom a Solution of these Objections, having answered the Reasons alledged against that Opinion which seemed most probable to St. Augustin. He takes notice, That the Innocents were honoured in the Church, as Martyrs.

The next Letter to St. Jerom, upon these words of St. James, ch. 2. v. 10. He that transgresses in one point, is guilty of all, was written immediately after the fore-going, as St. Augustin ob∣serves in his Retractations. He desireth St. Jerom to explain that Passage to him; and himself giveth an Explication of it, which he submits to St. Jerom's Judgment. He examineth the Stoicks Opinions, who taught, That all Sins were equal; and that of the Philosophers, who affirmed, That it was impossible to have any one Vertue, without being endowed with all. Having bandied these Questions on both Sides, he concludes, That though it were true, That One Vertue could not be alone; yet it would not follow, That All Sins were equal: But how∣ever, it is not true, That all Vertues must necessarily be joined together: because Vertue being no other thing than the love of what one ought to love, a Man may have more or less of this Love; for no Man can attain to perfect Charity in this Life. This being supposed, he saith, That whosoever transgresseth the Law in One Point, is guilty of breaking the Whole; because Sin is against Charity, and Charity is the fulfilling of the Law. But from hence it doth not follow that all Sins are equal; because that though every Sin violates Charity, upon which the Law dependeth; yet that hinders not but that a Man is more or less guilty, according as the Sins he commits are greater or less. In a word, There is more or less Sin in us, according as there is more or less Charity; and we shall never be perfect in Charity, before we are delivered from the weakness of this mortal Flesh. Lastly, We ought not to despise small Sins, or daily Faults; but ask God Pardon for them, and blot them out by constant Prayers, and good Works. Whosoever should neglect to expiate them; and who thinking himself over∣righteous, should ask of God to be judged without Mercy, would doubtless come to Christ's Iudgment-Seat overwhelm'd with Sins that would weigh him down, and would find no Mercy.

The 168th. is a Letter of Thanks, which both Timasius and James return to St. Augustin, for his Book of Nature and Grace, composed in 415. which was dedicated to them.

In the 169th. St. Augustin answereth Evodius about two Questions which that Bishop had put to him; one concerning the Trinity; and the other about the Dove, under whose Shape the Holy Ghost appeared; and there he explains the Faith of the Church, concerning the Trinity and the Incarnation, very clearly and exactly. This Letter is of the same Year with the Book of Nature and Grace; that is, in 415.

The next Letter, in St. Augustin's and Alypius's Name, is upon the same Subject: There they instruct Maximus the Physician, who was newly converted from the Arian Heresie; and exhort him to reduce those to the Faith whom he had led into Error.

The next is a Note from St. Augustin, and Alypius, to Peregrinus, a Bishop; whereby they desire him to give them an Account of what Success their Letter to Maximus had; and not to be offended at the length of their Letter, because they used to write such to those Persons, whom they esteemed most. This Peregrinus not being made Bishop before the Year 413. it is likely both these Letters were not written before 415.

The 172d. is an Answer of St. Jerom to St. Augustin's 166th. and 167th. Letters. There he commendeth what St. Augustin had writ, and excuseth himself from making any Answer. This Letter was brought by Orosius, in 416.

The 173d. is directed to Donatus, a Donatist Priest, of the Town of Carthagena, in the Diocess of Hippo, who having been informed, That there was an Order to Arrest, and to carry him to Church, had purposed to throw himself into a Well. St. Augustin shews him, in this Letter, the Excess of his Folly; proving, That it is just to force them to do Good that are bent to do Evil. This Letter was written after the Conference at Carthage.

The 174th. Letter of St. Augustin to Aurelius, Bishop of Carthage, was sent with his Book of the Trinity, completed in 410.

The 175th. to Pope Innocent I. is not a particular Letter of St. Augustin's, but a Synodical Epistle of the Council assembled at Carthage in 416. whereby the Bishops of that Council, to the Number of 68. inform the Pope of what they had done in the Council against Pelagius, and Coelestius: How Orosius having delivered them the Letters of Heros, and Lazarus, against Pela∣gius, and Coelestius, after they had revised what they had done before at Carthage, Five Years since, against Coelestius, they had again Anathematized their Errours, to reclaim those that started them, from that Extravagancy; or, at the least, to Cure such as were infected already, and to preserve such as might be infected, in process of time, from the Contagion. They make the Pope acquainted with it, that so the Authority of the See of Rome, being joined with the Judgment of the African Bishops, might secure the Salvation of many, and call back, into the right way, those that had gone astray. They refute afterwards, the Principal Errors of the Pelagians, against Grace, and Original Sin. They add, That though Pelagius had been justly acquitted in the Council of Palaestine, yet now the growing Errour, that over-spreads the Church, ought to be Anathematized. Lastly, That though both Pelagius, and Coelestius, seem to disown their Errours, and have undertaken to deny that they ever owned them, and to af∣firm, that the Writings objected to them, are none of theirs; yet Anathema's ought to be pro∣nounced against any one who dares teach, and averr, That the natural Strength of Man, is suffi∣cient to avoid Sin, and to accomplish God's Commandments▪And that dares affirm, That Children need not be delivered from Perdition, by the Baptism of Jesus Christ; or, that they can have a share, in eternal Life, without that Sacrament.

The 176th. is likewise a Synodical Letter of the Council of Milevis, made up of 60 Numi∣dian Bishops, and Assembled at the same time with the foregoing. They exhort Pope Inno∣cent to use his Authority, to Condemn that new Heresie which was an Enemy of the Grace of Jesus Christ. They accuse Coelestius, and Pelagius, as the Authors of it; yet hoping that they will renounce their Errours.

Besides these Two Letters, St. Augustin writ a particular one in the Name of the Bishops, Aurelius, Alypius, Evodius, and Possidius, his Collegues, and familiar Friends; wherein he represents to him, That Pelagius having lived long at Rome, it was a thing of great Conse∣quence there, to Condemn plainly the Errour which he taught; and, that it were convenient to send for Pelagius, to examine him, and oblige him to make such a Confession of Faith, as might not be capable of an ill Explication; and to anathematize the Errours that were found in his Books. They refute likewise the Pelagian Doctrine, explaining the Difference be∣twixt the Law, and Grace; and shewing the Necessity of the Latter to fulfil the Command∣ments.

St. Augustin wrote again upon the same Subject, and about the same time, the 178th. Let∣ter to Hilary, supposed to be Bishop of Narbon; and the 179th. to John of Jerusalem, to whom he sendeth his Book of Nature, and Grace, with that of Pelagius, desiring, in exchange, The Ecclesiastical Acts; whereby it appeared, That Pelagius had been Justified; he means, the Acts of the Council of Diospolis. All these Letters are written in 416. Orosius being come back again, who brought from Palaestine, into Africa, Heros's, and Lazarus's Letters against Pelagius.

The 180th. to Oceanus a Gentleman of Rome, is also of the same time. This Man had em∣braced St. Jerom's Opinion about the Origination of Souls, and concerning an officious Lye. St. Augustin shews him, in few Words, the Difficulties that attend St. Jerom's Opinion, about the Origination of Souls, with the difference betwixt Tropes, or Metaphors, and Lying. He observes, That St. Jerom, with whom he had had a Dispute about that Subject, had altered his Mind in his Dialogue against Pelagius. He desireth Oceanus to send him a Treatise of that Fa∣ther, whereof Orosius had spoken to him, and wherein he treated of the Resurrection of the Flesh.

The 181st. 182d. 183d. and 184th. Letters, are Pope Innocent's Answers to those of the African Bishops; whereby he approves, and confirms all that was done in Africa, against Pelagius, and Coelestius; they are of the Year 417.

The 185th. Letter, is amongst those Discourses that St. Augustin mentions in his Retractati∣ons, where he calls it the Book of the Correction of the Donatists, against those who found fault, that the Imperial Laws were put in Execution to make them return into the Church. He di∣rects it to Bonifacius a Tribune, and afterwards Count in Africa.

Having shewed there the difference betwixt the Arian Heresie, and the Donatists Schism, he proves, That keeping within the Rules of Christian Moderation, the terrour of the Laws may be used to reduce Hereticks to the Church. He speaketh at large of the Cruelties which the Donatists, and particularly the Circumcellians exercised against the Catholicks. He refutes all the Reasons then alledged at large; which Reasons were now made use of, to perswade Men, that Hereticks are not to be reclaimed from their Errors, by Force, or Punishments. He says some Things concerning Penance, and Remission of Sins: That Baptism blots cut all Sins; and that, by Penance, they may also be remitted; and,

That if the Church hath or∣dained, That none of those, who have been under Penance, shall be admitted into the Clergy, or kept in it, this is only for the upholding of Discipline, least some should do Pe∣nance, out of Pride, with a Design to obtain Ecclesiastical Dignities; not that she would cast Criminals into Despair, how Guilty soever they be,▪ but that this Method is altered upon those Occasions, where the Business is not only to secure the Salvation of some parti∣cular Men, but to deliver whole Nations from Death. In which Circumstances, the Church hath remitted much of the Severity of her Discipline, to find a Remedy for greater Evils and for this very Reason, she dealeth thus with the Donatists: That she is satisfied if they expiate their Sin of Separation by as bitter Grief as was that of St. Peter; and she preser∣veth their Rank and Dignity among the Clergy.

That the Church practised this, when whole Nations were to be reclaimed from Errour, or Heresie: That Lucifer Calaritanus was looked upon as a Schismatick, for being of another Opinion: That the Sin of the Holy Ghost is not Errour, or Blasphemy, since it would thence follow, that no Heretick ought to be admit∣ted to Penance, or obtain Remission of his Sin; and that, by this, no other thing can be un∣derstood but final Impenitency. St. Augustin observes, in his Retractations that he wrote this Letter at the same time that he composed the Book of The Acts of Pelagius, in 417.

The 186th. Letter of St. Augustin, is written to Paulinus, Bishop of Nola; not to Boniface, as it is entituled in some Manuscripts; siince it is quoted as directed to Paulinus, in the Book of the Gift of Perseverance, Ch. 21. and by St. Prosper, Ch. 43. against Cassianus his Conferen∣ces. And indeed, St. Augustin quotes a Passage out of a Letter, from the Person to whom he wrote, which is found in the 8th. Letter of St. Paulinus' to Sulpitius Severus. This whereof we now speak, is written in the Names of St. Augustin, and Alypius, who was an intimate Friend of St. Paulinus, against Pelagius, whom this Saint had in great Esteem. In this Letter St. Augustin layeth open all his Principles, concerning Grace, and Predestination, and refuteth Pelagius his Notions. He begins with the Relation of what had been done against him in Africa, and sends Copies of it to St. Paulinus. Then he layeth down these Positions, That the Grace of Jesus Christ, that is necessary to enable us to do Good, is altogether of Free Gift; That God sheweth Mercy to whom he pleaseth; That he takes whom he thinks fit, out of the Mass of Corruption, into which Mankind is fallen, through Adam's Sin. He insisteth, par∣ticularly, upon the Example of Infants, whereof some are saved through God's Mercy, and others damned, because of Original Sin. He refutes Pelagius's Opinion, touching the State of Infants, whom he supposes to be in a middle State between Heaven, and Hell, which he cal∣leth Eternal Life. He proves, That Free-Will does not consist in an Indifference, to Good or Evil; for it is enclined to Evil, and cannot do Good, without the assistance of the Grace of God. He tells St. Paulinus, that Pelagius maintained the contrary in his former Books, that afterwards he seems to have retracted his Errours in the Council of Diospolis, whereof he had received the Acts; and then he dissembled again sometimes, confessing the Necessity of Grace, and often affirming, That the Will had Power of it self to abstain from Sin: So that God's Assistance, in his Opinion, was afforded us over and above, to enable us to do that which is good with the greater Ease. These are the Opinions refuted by St. Augustin in this Letter, where he urges a Passage from a Letter, written by St. Paulinus, to convince him, that he ought to reject them, and condemn Pelagius.

The next Letter to Dardanus, is a Didactical Treatise, mentioned by St Augustin in his Re∣tractations. There he shews how God is said to be Omnipresent, upon occasion of Two Questions, which Dardanus had proposed to him: The one upon these Words of Jesus Christ to the good Thief, This Day thou shalt be with me in Paradise; and the other, Whether Children have any Notion of God in the Womb. The former Difficulty is grounded upon this, That the humane Nature of Christ was not in Paradise immediately after his Death, because his Soul descended into Hell, and his Body was laid in the Grave. St. Augustin saith, That the Soul of Jesus Christ, may be said to have been in the same Place where the Souls of the Righteous were, which may be called Para∣dise. But he thinks it more probable, That this is meant of Christ's Divinity, which never ceased to be in Paradise. This puts St. Augustin upon treating of God's Immensity, whereof he speaketh after a very high manner; shewing, That we ought not to conceive of it, as of a Corporeal Extention. He discourseth, likewise, of the particular manner, how God dwelleth in the Saints, and in Baptized Infants that do not yet know him. And this leads him to the Second Question, about the Knowledge of Children that are yet in their Mother's Womb. He

affirms, That they have no knowledge, no, not after their Birth, and that the Holy Ghost dwelleth in them, and they know it not; whereupon he enlargeth upon Justification that is wrought by Regeneration, and speaketh of Birth in Sin, the Necessity of Baptismal Grace, and of Faith in Jesus Christ. It is evident by St. Augustin's Retractations, That this Letter was written in the Year 417. It is directed to the Praefect of Gaul, to whom St. Jerom wrote also a Letter.

The 188th. Letter to Juliana, the Mother of Demetrias, is a warning given to that holy Widow by St. Augustin and Alypius, not to suffer her self to be surprized by the hidden Poison in the Letter to Demetrias, whereof they did not yet know Pelagius to be the Author. He shews her, That this Letter ascribeth all to Free-Will; whereas the Principle of Christian Piety is to attribute all to God.

In the 189th. St. Augustin lays down several very useful and edifying Rules to Boniface, to live Christianly in the Profession of Arms; recommending to him, above all things, Charity towards God, and towards his Neighbour; as the Foundation of all Vertues. He shows, That to be a Soldier is no unlawful Profession, and that a Soldier may be a good Christian, if he be desirous of Peace, and goes to War with no other design but that of procuring it. And that Necessity alone ought to put him upon taking away his Enemy's Life, and that his own Will ought not to have any hand in it. That he ought to do no Injustice nor Violence, nor get Wealth by wicked means. At last, he advises him to remember, That every good thing cometh from God: It is not certainly known in what Year this Letter was written.

The 190th. to Optatus contains St. Augustin's Opinions touching the Original of the Soul. First of all he supposes Original Sin as an indubitable thing; Then he saith, That whereas he had written; that we may without danger be ignorant of the Soul's Extraction, it is with this Proviso, that we certainly hold, 1. That it is not of God's Substance, but a Creature. 2. That it is a Spirit, and not a Body. 3. That it is not placed in the Body for a Punishment of Sins committed in another Life. He saith afterwards. That no Man can be justified but by Faith in Jesus Christ, and that it was that Faith which justified the Patriarchs. He enlargeth also upon the free Predestination of God's Elect, which is the choice that God made of them to take them by his Grace out of the mass of Perdition, and upon the eternal Death of Children dying be∣fore Baptism. Lastly, He endeavours to prove, That if we reject Tertullian's gross Opinion, who supposed the Soul to be Corporeal, the Notion of the Propagation of Souls agreeth best with Original Sin, though it hath some Difficulties. He observes, That it was the most general Opinion in the West, and he believes it more probable, than that of constant Creation; yet he dares not decide any thing upon this Matter, neither will he condemn the Pelagians for holding this latter Opinion; But because they draw from it a Consequence against Original Sin, he speaks of the Condemnation of Pelagius's Doctrine by the Popes, Innocent and Zosimus, and quotes a Letter of the latter which is not extant: St. Augustin writ this Letter at Caesarea, where he dwelt some time after the Council of Carthage, in the Year 418. There are these two curious Sentences: The first, We make our selves unworthy of Knowledge, if we desire that others should believe that we know them, when we are ignorant of them. The second, It is rashness to decide by Conjecture what Reason doth not discover, and what the Holy Scripture doth not clearly teach.

In the 191st. Letter, St. Augustin congratulates Sixtus the Priest, afterwards Bishop of Rome, who was suspected to have been a favourer of the Pelagians, because he declared himself for Grace. He desireth him to beware of those, who not daring to set forth their Doctrine openly, did notwithstanding sow it secretly; praying him to reclaim those with Meekness, whom Fear kept in deep silence, but preserved still the same Venom in their Hearts.

In the 192d. he entertaineth Coelestinus the Deacon, afterwards Bishop of Rome, with the Duties of Christian Charity. He saith, That this Vertue is not of the Nature of those Things which cease to be after performance; for the more a Man performs Actions of Charity, the more Charitable he is. That no Man ought to want this Duty towards his Friends, since all Men are obliged to exercise it towards their Enemies: That Charity towards Enemies, is the way to make them Friends: for it makes us desire that they should become vertuous, which they can∣not be, unless they be in Charity with those that wish them so much good, even the same Cha∣rity that others have for them. That it is not with Charity as it is with Money: for the less we think to be re-imbursed, the more we love those that we give Money to; whereas the more desi∣rous we are that those should prove Charitable towards us, to whom we shew Charity, the more we love them. One may plainly see that this Letter is a Christian Complement wittily written. It was sent at the same time with the two next to Albinus, after St. Augustin's return to Hippo, whither he did not come till the 20th of September of the Year 418. for it ap∣peareth by the Acts of the Conference which he had with Emeritus, that he was then in Mauritania.

The 193d. Letter lately Published out of a Manuscript, is directed to Mercator, who is thought to be the same that writ against Pelagius and the Nestorians. St. Augustin having ex∣cused himself, that he had not given him an Answer sooner, by reason of his Journey into Mau∣ritania, shows him here, That since the Pelagians own that Children in Baptism believe through other Men's Faith, they may own likewise, That Original Sin is remitted to them, by reason of others believing. He addeth some proofs, of their being born in Sin; and that they cannot

enjoy Eternal Life without being Baptized. He holds Death to be a Punishment for Sin, and answereth the Objection of some Pelagians; who, to prove the contrary, alledged the Examples of Enoch and Elias, who died not. St. Augustin answereth, That it is probable that they shall die some time or other; but if they die not, it is by the special grace of God, who is able to re∣mit the Punishment of Sin no less than Sin it self. This Objection raises another that is better grounded: How can the Penalty of Sin remain, after the Sin is remitted? St. Augustin doth not resolve it here, but referrs us to his Book of Infant-Baptism. What followeth concerning the Resurrection, is taken out of St. Augustin's Answers to Dulcitius his Objections.

The next, which is the Second Letter to Sixtus Presbyter of Rome, was written some time after the former; He relates there the Pelagian Errors, which he refutes by confirming the contrary Doctrine. These Errors are, 1. That Free-Will can do no Good without God's help. 2. That God were Unjust, if he shew'd Mercy to some and not to others. 3. That God doth indeed afford help, but that is only to Merit. 4. That Faith, which is the beginning of Justi∣fication, depends upon Mens Free-Will. St. Augustin opposes to these Opinions St. Paul's. Do∣ctrine in the Epistle to the Romans; from which he concludes, That all Men are in the State of Perdition, and that God gives his Grace, and sheweth Mercy to whom he pleaseth; He oweth it to none, and they that receive it not, cannot accuse him of Injustice, since they are condemned either for Original Sin, or for those which they have added besides; That he grants not this Grace to Merit, since there are no Merits previous to Grace; That he hardneth the Heart, not by inspiring Malice, but by withdrawing his Grace. These are the Maxims laid down by St. Au∣gustin in this Letter, and which he confirms by the Example of Children dying either before or after Baptism, as it pleaseth God; and by what St. Paul saith in the Epistle to the Romans, of Jacob's Predestination, and Esau's Reprobation.

The 195th. is a Note of S. Jerom's to St. Augustin, wherein he calls him Happy, because he was hated by Hereticks for refuting them; and had in Veneration by Catholicks, for defending the Doctrine of the Church.

In the 196th. to Asellicus, St. Augustin having proved, That it is not lawful for Christians to observe the Jewish Laws and Ceremonies, treats of the Usefulness and Effects of the Law, and of the Necessity of Grace against the Pelagians. Donatus was Primate of Numidia when this Letter was written; he was in that Station in the Council of Carthage in 418, and the Pelagians were Condemned already.

The 197th. Letter is directed to Hesychius Bishop of Salona. St. Augustin endeavoureth to undeceive that Bishop, who fansied that the End of the World was at hand, showing, That that time is unknown to Men. He doth not believe it to be very near, because the Gospel had not yet been Preached throughout the whole Earth. Towards the latter end, he disapproves the fanciful Opinion of a certain Man, whom St. Jerom in his Commentary upon the Prophet Daniel, had accused of rashness, for affirming, That Daniel's Weeks related to the last, and not to the first coming of Jesus Christ.

Hesychius returns this Answer to St. Augustin in the 198th. Letter, That though none know∣eth either the Day or the Hour of the last Judgment, yet we may know whether it be far off, by the Signs, which Jesus Christ told us should precede his appearing; but however, it is an act of Piety to look for it, as near at hand. He answereth what St. Augustin had said, That the Gospel not having been Preached all the Earth over, it was not likely that the Day of Judgment should happen so soon. He answers it, I say, by shewing that the Apostle St. Paul had look'd upon that Prophecy as already fulfilled; and at last approveth of their Opinion, who believed that the Weeks spoken of by Daniel, were not yet fulfilled. One of the Reasons this Bishop grounded his Opinion upon, is that Jesus Christ foretelleth the Destruction of Jerusalem, and the End of the World at once: And he assures him, That the Son of Man will be at hand, when Jerusalem is destroy'd.

St. Augustin having received this Letter, writes back to Hesychius the 199th. Letter; wherein, after a long Discourse upon this Principle of Morality, That without enquiring when Christ shall come, we ought rather be ready to receive him when he cometh: He saith, That no place of Scripture doth mark the time of the Last Judgment, nor teaches whether it be near or far off. He refutes the Inferences which Hesychius had drawn from some Passages of Scripture; and shews, That Daniel's Weeks cannot be understood of Christ's last coming: And at last he di∣stinguisheth in the Prophecies in the 24th. Ch. of St. Matthew's Gospel, and in the 13th. Ch. of St. Mark, what concerns the Destruction of Jerusalem, from that which relates to the End of the World; and clears the Circumstances of those Predictions. Finally, he concludes, That we should have a care not to be mistaken upon that Question. That none is mistaken, but when he thinks he knows, and affirms what he knows not. He represents the Disposition of three sorts of Persons who wait for the Appearance of Jesus Christ; One believeth, That he will shortly come; The other thinks, That it will be a great while first; And the third confesses, That he doth not know whether he will come sooner or later. He saith thereupon, That the Notion of his coming quickly, is more according to our Wishes; but it is most dangerous if we should be deceived. He on the contrary, who believes, That Jesus Christ will not come so soon, but yet believeth, hopeth, and desireth his coming, cannot be deceived, but his Error will turn to his Comfort: As for the Third, who owneth that he knows nothing of it, he wishes for what the first promiseth, and if ready to bear patiently what the other puts him in fear of, and asserts

Nothing, is out of danger of being deceived. Experience hath taught us, That the Condition of the last is best, and to be embraced of all Men, until the Day of Judgment comes. These three Letters in all probability belong to the Year 418. or 419.

St. Augustin wrote the 200••th▪ Letter to Count Valerius, about his Books of Concupiscence and Matrimony, which he sent unto him after he had finished them in 418.

The 201st. is an Order from the Emperors Honorius and Theodosius, directed to Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, whereby they enjoyn him, to let all the Bishops know. That they must subscribe the Condemnation of Pelagius and Coelestius, whom they had expelled out of Rome; and that as many as through impious obstinacy should refuse to do it, should be deprived of their Digni∣ties, Banished for ever out of their Cities, and Excluded from the Communion of the Church. This Letter is dated the 8th. of June 419. At the latter end it is observed, That another like this was directed to St. Augustin, which shows, That the respect which the Emperors paid to the Dignity of the Church of Carthage, they paid likewise to the Merit and high Reputation of St. Augustin.

The 202d. is a Letter of St. Jerom's to Alypius and St. Augustin, expressing his joy for their Victory over Pelagius and Coelestius; and excusing himself for not having yet refuted the Books of one Anianus, a Pelagian. It is the same Anianus who translated some of St. Chrysostom's Ho∣milies, and dedicated them to Orontius, a Pelagian Bishop, condemned in the Council of Ephesus. Bede mentions a Letter of this Author directed to Evangelus, where he gives to those of St. Au∣gustin's Party the name of Traducians.

By the 203d. Letter, St. Augustin exhorteth Largus to despise the Goods of this Life, whereof he knew the Vanity by his own Experience, and to profit by the Mischiefs that happened to him. This Largus was yet Proconsul in Africa in 419. This Letter seems to have been written in 420. after his being recalled.

In the 204th. to Duicitius, St. Augustiii shews, That he had already fully answered the Do∣natists, and laments the fury of those Wretches that murthered themselves, when they could do the Catholicks no further harm. Upon this occasion he treateth of Murder, and shows, That it is not lawful for a Man to kill himself, nor any other that was desirous of Death; He Answers the Case of Razias, which is well told in the Maccabees, and was looked upon as a noble and generous Action, but not approved by him as Wise and Vertuous. This Letter was written in Gaudentius's time, and composed in 420.

The 205th. Letter to Consentius, contains the Explication of some Difficulties about the Na∣ture of glorified Bodies. Consentius had asked St. Augustin, whether our Saviour's Body, hath now Flesh and Bones, with the same parts and features which he had upon Earth. St. Augustin resolveth this question, saying, That Christ's Body is altogether such in Heaven as it was upon Earth, when he left it to ascend intoHeaven, and that it appeareth by the Gospel, that he had Hands and Feet, Flesh and Bones, as well after as before the Resurrection: That no mention is made of his Blood, and it is not convenient to ingage too far in those Matters, for fear of entring upon other very hard Questions, such as these; If there is Blood, is not there also Phlegm, Choler, or Melancholy, since the mixture of these four Humours make up the Temper of Humane Bodies: Yet St. Augustin denieth not but that these Humours may be in glorified Bo∣dies; but that we ought to have a care of believing them alterable and corruptible; whereupon he undertakes to show by the Testimony of St. Paul, that glorified Bodies shall be incorruptible and freed from all corporeal and earthly qualities. Consentius had asked likewise, whether those that had been baptized and died without Penance for Sins committed after Baptism, should ob∣tain Remission of them in a certain time. St. Augustin remits him to his Treatise of Faith and Good Works, where he had handled that Question. Lastly, Consentius desired to know, VVhether God's breathing upon Adam was his Soul. St. Augustin answers, That it was either his Soul, or that which produced it; but we must be sure not to believe that the Soul is any part of God. Consentius to whom this Letter is written, is the same to whom St. Augustin dedicated his Trea∣tise of Lying, composed in 420. It is probable, that, if this Letter be of the same time, it was written after his Book of Faith and Good Works, which was made in 413.

The 206th. is a Letter of Recommendation to Count Valerius in the behalf of Bishop Felix.

The next, is that which St. Augustin writ to Bishop Claudius, when he sent him his Books against Julianus, published after St. Jerom's Death in 421.

In the 208th. St. Augustin exhorts the Virgin Felicia, newly returned to the Church from the Donatist's Party, and Scandalized by some Bishops disorders; to continue always in the bosom of the Catholick Church, notwithstanding all those Scandals where she was afflicted. And this gave occasion to his Discourse of Good and Evil Pastors. It is thought, that the occasion of this Letter, was the Scandal given by Antonius Bishop of Fussala, mentioned in the following Letter, supposed to have been written in the end of the Year 422. but that is uncertain.

It is equally uncertain that the next Letter to Pope Coelestine is written by St. Augustin; some Criticks doubt it, 1. Because the Stile of this Letter is not, as they pretend, perfectly like that of the other Letters of St. Augustin. 2. Because it is found but in one only Manuscript of the Vatican Library, which is not above 200 Years old. 3. Because St. Augustin seems to speak there after a low manner, and unworthy of his wonted Courage. 4. Because it seemeth not to agree with the Opinions of St. Augustin, nor of the other Africans, about Appeals. 5. Because Coe∣lestine

could not threaten then to send Clerks into Africa, to see his Judgments executed, as he doth in this Letter; because Affairs in Africa were then in great Disorder, and the Emperors had not much Authority in those Provinces that were 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by a Tyrant. Yet it must be con∣fessed, That this Letter agrees exceeding well to the Customs and Manners of the African Church in St. Augustin's time and has a Character of Sincerity. However, If this Letter be truly St. Au∣gustin's he writ it in the beginning of Coelestine's Pontificat, since he begins it with congratulating his Promotion, which was compassed without Intrigues or Division. He speaks afterwards of Antonius his Business, whom he had ordained Bishop of Fussala, a Town in the Diocess of Hippo, where no Bishop had been before. This Man was brought up in St. Augustin's Monastery, and looked upon by him as a Man of great Probity: but seeing himself exalted to such a Dignity, he gave way to his Passions, lived disorderly, and greatly vexed the People that were under his Ju∣risdiction: being accused before the Provincial Council, he could not be convicted of the Sin of Uncleanness that was laid to his Charge; but it appeared that he had oppressed and tyrannized over the People intolerably: Thus the Judges finding not sufficient cause utterly to deprive him, and being withal unwilling his Fault should pass without Punishment, left him the quality of Bishop, upon condition that he should not perform the Functions thereof, nor have any Authority over a People whom he had used so unjustly.

To hinder the Execution of this Judgment, Antonins appealed to the Pope, who pretended a Right to receive Appeals from the Judgments of the African Bishops, though these contested his Right. This happened at a time, when they had bound themselves to see the Canons of the Council of Sardica, which the Pope had alledged, as the Canons of the Council of Nice, executed with this Proviso, Till they were assured that they were actually made by the Council of Nice. Antonius therefore obtained of Boniface a Letter, enjoyning that he should be restored, if he had truly stated his Case. He returned triumphing with that Letter. But the African Bishops regarded it not: And being threatned, that the Civil Authority should be made use of to make them observe the Pope's Orders, St. Augustin took upon himself to write this Letter to Coelestine, wherein he intreateth him by the Blood of Jesus Christ, and by St. Peter's Memory; who forbad the Pastors of the Church to exercise Dominion; not to suffer things to go to that extremity: telling him, That his Heart was so set upon that Business, That he would renounce his Bishoprick, if Antonius was restored at Fussala. He was not restored; and we learn by the 224th. Letter, That his Diocess was immediately dependant upon St. Augustin, though after∣wards we meet with a Bishop of that place.

Antonius flattered himself with these hopes, either that they would have degraded him from the Episcopal Dignity, or have left him in the Bishoprick. St. Augustin affirms on the contrary, That there are Examples of Judgments given, or approved by the Holy Apostolick See, whereby Bishops were Punished, without being absolutely degraded: He citeth three of the latest; That of Priscus Bishop of the Province of Mauritania Caesariensis, who was suffered to continue in his Bishoprick, being only barr'd from the Metropolitan Dignity, to which his Seniority might have promoted him in his turn; That of Victor, Bishop of the same Province, who was likewise excluded the right of Primacy, and with whom no other Bishop did communicate in his Diocess; And that of Bishop Laurentius, with whom they proceeded as they had done with Antonius of Fussala. St. Augustin might have alledged besides, those Canons which allow to Bishops the Rank and Honour of their Dignity, and yet deprive them both of the Function and Jurisdiction.

In the 210th Letter St. Augustin instructeth Felicitas and Rusticus how the Evils of this Life are to be endured, and gives them Rules for brotherly Correction. It is probable, that the occasion of Writing upon this Subject, was the Dissention which happened among the Virgins consecrated to God, spoken of in the following Letter, about their Superior, whom the Nuns designed to change. St. Augustin having reproved them for it, and exhorted them to Peace and Obedience, prescribeth them a most wise and prudent Rule of Life. This Letter was written after the Death of St. Augustin's Sister, who governed that Monastery at the time when most of the Donatists were re-united, in 424.

The 212th. is a Letter of Recommendation to Quintianus, in the behalf of an holy Widow named Galla, and of her Daughter Simpliciola, who carried about with them the Reliques of the Martyr St. Stephen.

After this Letter, comes the Act made at Hippo, upon the 14th. of September, 426. in the Church of Peace: whereby St. Augustin chuseth Heraclius the Priest to be his Successor and Co-adjutor, yet without admitting him into Bishop's Orders; and the People approve his Choice with their Acclamations.

The Occasion of the 214th. Letter is this: St. Augustin having been informed by two Bre∣thren of the Monastery at Adrumetum, that there had been some Disputes among the Monks of that Convent, about Grace and Free-Will; because, some willing to establish the Doctrine of Grace, went so far as to deny Free-Will: whereas the others acknowledging Free-Will, did confess notwithstanding, that it was assisted by the help of the Grace of Jesus Christ; approves of the latter Opinion; affirming, That he taught no other Doctrine, in his Letter to Saint Sixtus.

He again handleth the same Matter in the next Letter, directed to Valentinus, Abbot of the Monastery at Adrumetum, and to the Brethren of the same Monastery. He joined

to this Letter his Book of Grace and Free-Will, which he sent at the same time to instruct them.

Valentinus answered St. Augustin in the 216th. Letter: wherein, after he had thank'd him for his Letters, he gives him an Account how that Disturbance happened in his Monastery, by the Imprudence of five or six that were offended at those Discourses of St. Augustin, which Florus had brought from Uzala to their Convent. That Evodius, Bishop of Uzala, not being able to satisfie them, they came to him: That this Visit had produced a good Effect, seeing it brought to their Monastery such holy Instructions as his were, and had confirmed them in their Belief touching Grace and Free-Will. These Letters are of the Year 426.

The 217th. Letter of St. Augustin is written to Vitalis, to undeceive him of those Notions which he had then taken up; namely, That the Beginning of Faith was not a Gift of God, but the mere Product of Man's Will. St. Augustin refutes this Opinion, by the Prayers of the Church; by St. Cyprian's Testimony, in his Book of The Lord's Prayer; and by several other Passages of Scripture. Afterwards he explains the difference betwixt the Law and Grace; proving, That the True Grace of Jesus Christ, doth not consist in Natural Helps, or in Exter∣nal Graces. At last he proposes Twelve Articles; wherein he comprehends whatsoever he thinks necessary to be believed concerning Grace. The Twelve Articles are these:

I. We know, That before Men were born into this World, they had no other wherein they did either Good or Evil.... But descending from Adam according to the Flesh, they par∣take, by their Birth, of the Poyson of that ancient Death which he became subject to by his Sin; and that they are not delivered from Eternal Death, except they are regenerated in Jesus Christ through his Grace.

II. We know, That the Grace of God is not given upon the account of any Merit, either to Infants, or to Men that are come to the Age of Reason.

III. We know, That Grace is an Assistance afforded for evert Action, to those that have attained to the Age of Reason.

IV. We know, That it is not given to all Men; and that those to whom it is given, re∣ceive it, without having deserved it by their Works, or by their Will; which appears parti∣cularly in Infants.

V. We know, That it is out of God's mere Mercy, that it is given to those to whom it is given.

VI. We know, That it is by a just Judgment of God, that it is not given to those to whom it is not given.

VII. We know, That we shall all appear before the Judgment-Seat of Jesus Christ, that every one may receive either Reward or Punishment according to what he shall have done in the Body, and not according to what he should have done had he lived longer.

VIII. We know, That Infants shall not receive Recompence or Punishment, but ac∣cording to what they shall have done in the Body; that is, whil'st they were in the Body; that is, according as some have been regenerate, and others not.

IX. We know, That Eternal Happiness is ensured to all those that die in Jesus Christ; and that nothing is imputed to them of what they might have done, had they been alive.

X. We know, That as many as Believe in God, Believe willingly, and by an Action of their free Will.

XI. We know, That we ought to pray unto God for those that Believe not, that they would Believe.

XII. We know, That whensoever any of these embraces the Faith, we are to give God Thanks sincerely, and from the bottom of our Hearts, as being an Effect of his Mercy, and that when we do it as we are wont to do, we perform a Duty incumbent upon us:

These are the Twelve fundamental Points of St. Augustin's Doctrine of Grace; to the which he restrains the Faith of the Catholick Church about that Matter. He applieth them likewise to his particular Dispute with Vitalis, to know whether Grace goes before, or only followeth the Will; that is, Whether Grace be given us, because we will have it? as Vitalis affirms: Or, Whether the Will it self is not a thing which God worketh in us by his Grace? as St. Au∣gustin pretends that it followeth upon the Twelve Principles which he lays down. To shew this, the rest of this Letter is taken up; wherein he concludes, That the Beginning of Faith, Conversion, and a good Mind, comes from God, and not from Free-Will. This Letter, in all probability, is one of the last of St. Augustin's Works concerning Grace.

In the 218th. Letter St. Augustin exhorts one Palatinus to persevere and to proceed in Piety, and not to trust to his own Strength. This likewise is one of the last of St. Augustin's Letters.

The 219th. is a Letter written in the Names of Aurelius, St. Augustin, and Florentius, Bi∣shops in Africa, to Proculus and Cilinnius, Bishops in Gaul, concerning Leporius the Monk; who having been expelled out of the Diocess of Marseilles, because of his Errors about the Incarnation, made a Retractation of them in Africa; which was drawn up by St. Augustin, and sent to the Gallican Bishops with this Letter; whereby they entreat the Bishops to whom

they write, to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 he had 〈◊〉〈◊〉 th••s•• Errors for 〈◊〉〈◊〉 they had expelled him. This Letter was written after the Books of Correction and Grace.

The 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉; who being married again after the death of his fo••mer W•••••• was engaged 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Business, and had committed very considerable ••aul•••• St. Augustin adviseth him by this Letter, to Contain, if he could persuade his Wife to con••en•• to it; an•• to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of his Authority, only to do good. This Letter is full of excellent in∣structions for Men of the Wor••d.

〈◊〉〈◊〉, a Deacon of C••••th••ge, de••••eth St. Augustin, by the 221st. Letter, to draw up a Catalogue of Heresies. St. Augustin excuses himself from doing it, in the 2••2d. The Dea∣con having again urged it by the 223d. he promises him in the 224th. to do it when he is at leisure. These Letters were written after his Book of Retractations, in 428.

The 225th. Letter is St. Prosper's▪ whereby he gives St. Augustin notice, That several Chri∣stians of Marseilles having seen his Works against the Pelagians, had believed, That what he taught concerning the Vocation of the Elect, was contrary to the Doctrine of the Fathers; and that they were more averse to his Notions, when they had read his Book of Co••••••cti•••• and Grace. Then he relateh their Opinions, and saith, (1.)

That they indeed acknowledge that all Men have sinned in Adam; and that our Salvation is not the Product of our Works, but of Grace, that works the same by the means of Regeneration: But they hold, That the Propitiation made by the Blood of Jesus Christ, is offered to all Men without Excep∣tion; so that as many as will embrace the Faith, and be Baptized, may obtain Salvation. (2.) That before the Creation, God by his Fore-knowledge, did know those that should Believe, and who with the succour of that Grace enabling them to preserve that Faith which they had once embraced, should maintain the same unto the end▪ and that he had predesti∣nated them to his Eternal Kingdom, foreseeing that after he had freely called them, they would make themselves worthy of his Election, and end their Life holily. (3.) That God calls all Men to the Faith, and to good Works, by his Instructions; and that Salvation is the Reward of those that are willing to do good. (4.) That whatsoever is said of the Decree of God's Will, touching the Call of Men, whereby it is said that the Elect have been sepa∣rated from the Reprobate, is fit for nothing but to inspire Men with Despondency, Idleness, Negligence and Lukewarmness; because it seems to no purpose to work, if the Reprobate cannot be saved, nor the Elect be damned. (5.) That thereby all Vertues are destroyed. (6.) That this Doctrine doth establish, under the Name of Predestination, a fatal and un∣avoidable Necessity, or forceth Men to say that Mankind were created of different Natures. (7.) That what is alledged out of the Epistle to the Romans, to prove, That Grace doth prevent the Merits of the Elect, was never understood in this sence by any Ecclesiastical Au∣thor. (8.) That some reduce that Grace which prevents our Merits, to the natural Faculties of Free-Will, and of Reason; by the good use whereof we arrive to that Grace which makes us to be regenerated in Jesus Christ. (9.) That God hath indeed resolved to communicate his Grace only to those that are Regenerate; but that all are called to partake of that saving Gift, whe∣ther it be by the Natural Law, or by the Preaching of the Gospel. (10.) That Men are as much disposed to Good as Evil: That the Spirit and the Will may equally turn to Evil; and, That Obedience or Disobedience to God's Command, wholly depends upon our Liberty. (11.) That Infants dying before the Use of Reason, are either saved or damned, according to what God foresees that they would have been, had they come to the Age of Acting and Deserving. (12.) That the same is to be said of the Nations which God hath not en∣lightned with the Light that is necessary to Salvation▪.

These are most of the Points of the Semipelagians Doctrine, and of the Objections which they made against that of St. Augustin. St. Prosper intreateth him by this Letter to refute these Persons Opinions, and to clear the Diffi∣culties proposed by them, telling him, That Hilary Bishop of Arles, a considerable Man, and much addicted to the Study of Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Matters; and who did much admire and approve St. Augustin's Doctrine in all other things, could not relish his Principles about the Decree of the Vocation of the Elect.

This is not that Hilary, who had been St. Augustin's Disciple, who writ at the same time with Prosper to St. Augustin upon the same Subject.

This Letter is the 226th. therein he gives a more particular Account than St. Prosper had done, of those Points of St. Augustin's Doctrine, that disturbed the Priests of Marseilles, of the Objections which they made, and of their Answers to those Passages of Scripture that were quoted by St. Augustin; which may be all reduced to these four Propositions. 1. That Man may believe, and desire to be healed, by the strength of his own Free-Will. 2. That when he is gone so far, God never denieth him his Grace. 3. That Election and Reprobation are Con∣sequences of God's Prescience, whereby he sees the Good or the Evil which Men shall do, or should have done if they had lived. 4. That Grace is not effectual of it self, and what help soever God affords to those that are Predestinated; it is still in their own Power either to make use of, or to reject it. Both these Letters were written in 429. after Hilary's promotion to the Bishoprick of Arles. St. Augustin answered them by his Books of the Predestination of the Saints, and of the Gift of Perseverance.

The 227th. to the holy old Man Alypius, is written upon the Conversion of two Pagans who had been baptized at Easter; The Name of the one, was Gabinianus; the other was a Physician

called Dioscorus, for whom God had wrought several Miracles, related by St. Augustin in this Letter. It is here placed among those that were written in 429. but the Date of it is uncertain.

The Date of the next to Honoratus is certain by Possidius's Testimony, who quotes it in the Life of St. Augustin; and affirms, That he writ it about the latter end of his Life; when the Vandals were almost Masters of Africa. He examines the Question in this Letter, Whether Priests, Clerks, and Bishops, may fly and forsake their Flocks in time of Persecution? St. Au∣gustin affirms, That there are but two Occasions upon which they are permitted so to do. 1. If the Persecutors designed Mischief to some particular Pastors by name, because then it is profita∣ble, even for the Good of the Church, for them to flee, and leave the others quiet. 2. When the Ministers of Jesus Christ meet with none that have need of their Ministery. In all other Cases, Pastors are obliged to watch over the Flock which Christ hath committed to them; neither can they forsake it without a Crime. This St. Augustin excellently proves in this Let∣ter, and in terms dictated by the Fire of his fervent Charity, and with Reasons supported by a Zeal altogether Divine. He represents the desolation of a Town which is like to be taken; and the Necessity of the presence of Christ's Ministers.

In such occasions, saith he, What flocking is there to the Church of Persons of all Ages and Sexes; whereof, some require Baptism, others Reconciliation, others to be put under Penance, and all crave comfort. If then no Ministers are to be found. What misfortune is that for such as go out of this Life, being Unregenerate, or not loosed? What Grief is it to their Kindred, if they be Faithful, that they cannot hope to see them with them in everlasting rest? What Crys, what Lamentations, nay, what Im∣precations from some, to see themselves without Ministers, and without Sacraments? If on the contrary, Ministers have proved Faithful, in not forsaking their People; they are help∣full to all the World, according to the Abilities which it hath pleased God to endue them with; Some are baptized, others are reconciled; none is deprived of the Communion of the Lord's-Body. All are conforted, fortified, and exhorted to implore by fervent Prayers the Assistance of the Mercy of God.

This Passage is very remarkable, since it shews what was the Church's Opinion at all times concerning the Necessity of Sacraments.

St. Augustin handleth two other Questions upon the same Subject: The First, Whether it be lawful for Pastors to flee in such Calamities, that they may preserve themselves for the Ser∣vice of the Church in more peaceable times. He saith, That they may do it if there be other Ministers, to supply their places, and who are necessary to the Church. The Second, if it hap∣pens that the Persecution were only against the Pastors, in this case they may flee; and whether is better, That the Church should want them by their going away, or be deprived of them by their Death? St. Augustin answers, That this Supposition is very extraordinary; That it seldom happens, that they aim only at Church-men; That in this case they might hide themselves. It is to be presumed, That as all the Laity shall not perish, so some of the Clergy may escape. That it were to be wished, that in such occasions some should fly, and others remain; Then it would be a fine thing, if among Ministers there should be a Dispute, who should stay behind, that the Church might not be forsaken. That to decide this Difference, it should be convenient to cast Lots, that none might go about to free himself from the necessity of staying, under pre∣tence of being more necessary for the Church than others.

He concludes with these words, We do what Jesus Christ, either Permits or Commands, if we withdraw when there are other Ministers to serve the Church. But when by our flight Christ's Sheep are deprived of the Food that is to sustain the life of their Souls, then we are hirelings.

The 229th. Letter is directed to Count Darius, who was sent into Africa to treat of Peace. St. Augustin wishes him Joy of that Employ. The Count gives him Thanks by the 230th. Let∣ter, and prayeth him to send him his Book of Confessions. This Saint satisfies him by the 231st. Letter, wherein he treateth occasionally of the love of Praise. He saith thereupon, 1. That Men ought not to desire Praises for that which is not praise-worthy in them. 2. That they should not propose to themselves as the end of their good Actions, to get Commendations from Men. 3. Yet they may desire the Praises of Men, for the sake of those very Men, because the Praises given to them, are profitable for others. 4. That such as find not in themselves those Vertues for which they are commended, ought to be ashamed that they are not what they are thought to be, and what they should be indeed; and this may make them desire to become such. 5. That on the contrary, if there be in them something of that which is commended, they are to give God thanks for it, and be glad to see that others have an esteem for Vertue. Towards the end of the Letter, he speaks of Prosperity and Adversity. The Caresses, saith he, of this World are more dangerous than its Persecutions, unless we look upon the Rest which we may enjoy here, as a means to make us lead a quiet and a peaceable Life in all Godliness and Honesty. This the Apostle commands us to ask of God: for if the heart be not full of Charity and Piety, rest and ease from the troubles of Life is but Perdition: and serves only as an Instrument or Provocation to Lust. If therefore we desire to lead a quiet Life, let it be only upon this account, that we may the better practise both Piety and Charity. These Letters are supposed to have been written about the latter end of St. Augustin's Life.

The Fourth Classe.

THE Last Classe of St. Augustin's Epistles, containeth those whose Date is not well known.

The First of these is the 232d. Letter, in answer to the Inhabitants of Madaura, whereof the greater Part were yet Idolaters. He exhorts them to embrace the Christian Religion; and to enduce them to it, he mentions the dreadfulness of the Last Judgment, which he proves shall infallibly come, because the other Prophecies are fulfilled: He also saith something con∣cerning the Mystery of the Trinity, and that of the Incarnation. This Letter was proba∣bly written some time after the Edict Published by Honorius in the Year 399. against the Tem∣ples.

The 233d. Letter, is a Challenge from St. Augustin to a Philosopher, one Longinianus, to oblige him to give an Account in Writing after what manner he believed, that God was to be Worshipped; and what he thought of Jesus Christ.

Longinianus answers St. Augustin in the 234th. Letter; and saith, according to Plato's Princi∣ples, That the way to come to God, is to live Well, and to get the Favour of the inferior Gods by Propitiatory Sacrifices, that we may come to the Supreme Creatour. As for Jesus Christ, he answereth, That he can say nothing of him, because he knew him not.

St. Augustin desireth Longinianus to explain himself about what he had said, That the Way to come to God was to live Well, and to purifie our Selves by Expiations and Sacrifices; he asketh him, Whether it be the same Thing, or Two different Things. This is in the 235th Letter.

By the 236th. he gives Deuterius notice, That he had degraded, and expelled a Deacon, one Victorinus, convicted of being a Manichee, though he was but a Hearer among them, and not one of those they call Elect. He speaks of the difference which they made betwixt those Two sorts of Persons; and he speaks of their principal Errours.

In the 237th. Letter, he opposes the Dreams of the Manichees, and Priscillianists, concern∣ing the Apocryphal Books; and ridicules the phantastical Interpretations, which they made of the Canonical Books.

The 238th. is a Relation of a Conference that St. Augustin had about the Mystery of the Trinity, with an Arian, called Pascentius. The Three following Letters directed to this Arian, carry on the same Dispute.

The 242d. is also written to Elpidius, an Arian, to whom he showeth, That the Son of God is equal to his Father.

In the 243d. St. Augustin exhorts Laetus, who having quitted the World, was tempted to return to it: He exhorts him, I say, to persevere in his former Resolution; and not to suffer his tenderness for his Relations, to weaken his Courage. He shews, in this Letter, That the renouncing of all Things to follow Christ, ought to proceed so far, as to leave Father and Mother, to serve God.

The 244th. is a Letter of Consolation to Chrysinus, for a Loss which he had su∣stained.

In the 245th. to Possidius, St. Augustin speaks, with great moderation, of Women's Dresses: He thinks, That fine Cloaths ought not to be forbidden to Married Women, who are obliged to please their Husbands; but he would not have them Paint, or Wash, to make them appear fairer, or fresher, because it is not probable, that their Husbands should desire to be thus de∣ceived; for the true Ornament of Christians, of both Sexes, is neither deceitful Painting, nor Gold, nor precious Stuffs, but Purity of Manners. Lastly, he prohibits those Superstitious Dres∣sings, which they used to render a kind of Homage to Daemons. He tells Possidius, That he would not advise him to ordain a Man that had been Baptized among the Donatists.

The 246th. Letter to Lampadius, is against those who accuse Fate for the Faults which they commit themselves.

By the 247th. Letter, St. Augustin reproves one Romulus, a Rich Man, that would make his Debtors to pay twice; pretending, That they had pay'd his Receiver in his Wrong.

The 248th. to Sebastianus, is concerning that Sorrow which affects the Righteous, because of the impiety of the Wicked.

In the 249th. St. Augustin Comforteth Restitutus the Deacon, who could hardly bear with the Disorders of ill Christians; and instructs him to keep Peace with the Wicked.

The 250th. Letter is very considerable. There St. Augustin resolveth a very nice Question: Whether a whole Family, or Community, may be Excommunicated for the Sin of one Mem∣ber. It is directed to a young Bishop, called Auxilius, who had Excommunicated one Classi∣cianus, with his whole Family, because he came to the Church to demand certain Persons who had taken Sanctuary there, after he had, by a false Oath, profaned the Sanctity of the Go∣spel. He asks that Bishop, VVhat Reason he could have for so doing; and how the Son can be Excommunicated for the Father's Sin, the VVife for her Husband's, and the Servant for

his Master's, yea the Children that are yet unborn: Excommunication being not a Punish∣ment which falls upon the Body, but an Effect of the Power given to Christ's Ministers, to bind and to loose, which properly concerns the Soul. St. Augustin confesses, That this Bishop might ground his Proceeding upon the Example of some great Bishops, who had Anathema∣tized whole Families for one particular Person's Sin. But he affirms, That they could hardly justifie their Action, and that he never durst do it himself. Yet he addeth, rather in Jest, than Earnest, that he is ready to hear his Reasons,

Your Youth (saith he) and the shortness of the time that you have been Bishop, will not hinder me from hearing your Reasons. I am ready to learn of you, how young soever you be; though the Grey Heirs that I wear, and all the Experience I may have got by those many Years that I have been Bishop, give me some small Authority over you.

After that, he Aggravates the Injustice of that Pretence which might prove the Loss of a Soul for want of Baptism, through the Impossibility to which the Sentence of Excommunication reduced those that were Excommunicated, from having recourse to the Sacraments. Wherefore he exhorteth Auxilius to revoke a Sentence, wherein Anger had a greater share than Justice; and so much the rather, because he, against whom it was pronoun∣ced, had no ways deserved it.

In the next Letter, St. Augustin sendeth Word to Classicianus, That he will propose that Question in a Council; that he was much concerned at Auxilius his Behaviour, especially because it might happen, that some might die without Baptism; that he will also cause to be examined there, if need be, this Question; Whether those ought not to be Excommunicated who deal unfaithfully with their Securities; and that, if it should be requisite, he would write to the See of Rome about it, that so what was to be done in such Occasions, might be settled with general Consent. But he sticks not to affirm,

That an unjust Excommunication is of great∣er Prejudice to him that pronounces it, than to him against whom it is pronounced; for∣asmuch as the Holy Ghost, who dwelleth in the Saints, never puts any to Pain who deserves it not: For if Charity is neither rash, nor hasty, What shall we say of him that diffuseth it into our Hearts?

The 251st. Letter was written by St. Augustin to Pancarius, concerning one Secundinus a Priest, that was accused before him. He tells Pancarius, That he will receive the Accusa∣tions of Catholicks, but not of Hereticks; and prays him not to suffer any Disorder to be committed in that Priest's House.

The Four following Letters were written about a Virgin that was an Orphan, who was com∣mitted to the Church's Trust. St. Augustin declares, in these Letters, That he takes all the Care of her that may be; and that he will not marry her, without her consent, to a Catholick; and that he was looking out for an advantageous Match for her.

The 256th. is an Answer of St. Augustin's to Christinus, who desired, That he would write to him, to exhort him to give himself to God.

The 257th. is a Letter of Complement to Orontius.

In the 258th. he Congratulates Martianus for being a Catechumen, exhorting him speedily to receive Baptism.

The 259th. was written to reclaim a very lewd Man, one Cornelius, from his evil Way; and adviseth him to imitate his Wife, who lately deceased; upon whom St. Augustin promiseth to write a Panegyrick, if he will follow her Vertue.

By the next, Audax desireth St. Augustin to write longer than he used to do, and concludes with Four Verses in his Commendation. St. Augustin excuseth himself for his great Business, advising him to read his Works, and to come and see him. That's the Subject of the 261st. Letter.

In the 262d. St. Augustin reproves one Ecdicia, a Lady, severely; who (unknown to her Husband, whom she had brought to consent to live in Continence with her) had distributed his whole Estate to the Poor, and put on a Widow's Habit. He enjoyns her to make her Hus∣band Satisfaction; who, out of Anger for his Wife's Behaviour, lived disorderly. This Let∣ter is full of excellent Instructions for married Wives, teaching them not to give their Husbands any occasion of Discontent, by indiscreet Devotion.

The 263d. is a Letter of Consolation to Sapida; who having wrought a Garment for her Brother Timothy, and he dying, desired, for her Comfort, that St. Augustin would wear it. St. Augustin thanks her; but wishes her to seek in the Scripture some more solid Conso∣lations.

In the 264th. he comforteth a Lady called Maxima, who beheld with Grief, and Disturbance, her Country infected with Errors.

The 265th. to Seleuciana, is a Refutation of the Enthusiastical Notions of a certain Novati∣an, concerning Baptism, and St. Peter's Repentance. He affirmeth, in the First place, That St. Peter was Baptized as well as the other Apostles: That it is an Errour to say, That he had not received the Baptism of Water before his Sin, though he had not yet received the Baptism of the Holy Ghost; yea, he thinks it probable, That the Apostles were Baptized by Christ him∣self. He saith, Secondly, That when it is said, that St. Peter did Penance, we are not to think that he did as they do in the Church, who are properly called Penitents. Thirdly, he distin∣guishes Two sorts of Penance, that which goeth before Baptism, and that which cometh after; when after Baptism Men have committed any of those Sins, for which they ought to be Excom∣municated,

and cut off from the Altar, after which they are reconciled if they deserve it: And this sort is the Penance of those to whom is properly given in the Church the Name of Peni∣tents. Besides these two sorts, They admit also a daily Penance of those very Faithful, that live in Piety and Humility; whereby they Petition, and obtain the forgiveness of light, but Customary Sins, which Humane Frailty makes us fall into; and which, saith he, we ought to expiate continually, l••st we be over-whelmed with their Number.

In the 266th. Letter, St. Augustin offers to Florentina, a Virgin, to explain all the Difficulties which she should desire to have cleared.

The 267th. is a Pious Letter to Fabiola; wherein he rejoyceth, because she bore the Exile of this Life with difficulty.

St. Augustin having borrowed a Sum of Money to pay the Debt of one Fascius, who retired into the Church, being pursued by his Creditors; intreateth his People in the 268th. Letter, to make a Gathering, that he might repay that Summ.

By the 269th. St. Augustin intreateth Bishop Nobilius to excuse him, because he could not be present at the Consecration of a new Church, to which that Bishop had invited him.

The last, is a Letter directed to St. Augustin, but the Author of it is not known. By it, he that wrote it, complaineth to St. Augustin, That he had not met him with Bishop Severus in the City of Leges, where he hoped to find him.

To these Letters, we ought to add the Fragment of a Letter of St. Augustin to Maximus, which the Benedictines have taken out of Primasius his Commentary upon the Revelations, and placed at the latter end of the Second Tome in their Edition. This Fragment contains several Rules concerning the degrees of Christian Perfection.

It is manifest by these Extracts from St. Augustin's Letters, That they are an inexhaustible Spring of Principles, Rules, Precepts and Maxims upon the Articles of our Faith, and the Disci∣pline of the Church upon Christian Morals, and the Government of Life: For which Reason, I insisted the longer upon them, and drew the Extracts at large, there being hardly one that deserves not particular Attention, and where there is not some fine stroke to be taken notice of. I intend to discourse more briefly of the rest of this Father's Works.

The Addition of Spurious Pieces annexed to this Volume, is not very large.

There are at first Thirteen Letters or Notes under the Names of St. Augustin to Boniface, and of Boniface to St. Augustin; containing several Passages taken out of St. Augustin's Genuine Let∣ters, and several things may be observed, which do not agree with the History of that time: They are composed by one who had a mind to exercise his Pen with that Fiction.

We need not speak here of Pelagius his Letter to Demetrias, which is after these to Boniface.

The two next, whereof the one is entituled, St. Cyril of Jerusalem's Letter to St. Augustin concerning the Vertues of St. Jerom: And the other, St. Augustin's Answer to St. Cyril about St. Jerom's Miracles; discover their Imposture by their very Title; as is observed, in another place; since St. Cyril of Jerusalem died long before St. Jerom.

Lastly, St. Augustin's Dispute with Pascentius, that was formerly placed among the Letters, Number 178. is very rightly placed by the Benedictines among the Spurious Books. It is certain by the 238th. Letter, That St. Augustin had a Conference with Pascentius; but nothing like that which is mentioned in this Letter. For he observes, 1. That he could not obtain, that what was said on both sides, should be committed to Writing, but every thing is written in this Confe∣rence and inserted into the Publick Acts. In the former, no body Presided; in this, there is a Judge called Laurentius. That whereof St. Augustin speaks, was held at Carthage; This is supposed to have been at Hippo. Both Possidius and St. Augustin mention one Conference with Pascentius; but this supposeth that they had had a Dispute before. The Character of both the Persons introduced speaking in this, is nothing like either St. Augustin's or Pascentius's. This is but a cold Dispute, and there is little said to the purpose. The Answers made for St. Augustin are weak, and the Objections attributed to Pascentius, have nothing of that Fire and Rage which Possidius taxeth him with. The Stile of those Answers, supposed to be St. Augustin's, comes not near that of this Saint, either in his Letters or in his Conferences. There are terms and man∣ners of Expression, which he never used, and which do not belong to that time. In a word, This Treatise is found in no Manuscripts annexed to St. Augustin's Works or Letters. These Rea∣sons sufficiently prove, That this Work is not a Conference which St. Augustin really had with Pascentius, but a Dialogue composed by some other Author. Now we know none to whom it may be more properly ascribed, than to Vigilius Tapsensis, who composed several Dialogues of that sort under the Names of several great Men.

The THIRD TOME.

THE Third Tome of the New Edition of St. Augustin, containeth his Treatises upon the Holy Scripture, which in the former Editions were dispersed in other Volumes. * 1.153

The Benedictines have placed the Books of Christian Doctrine first, which may serve in stead of a Preface to St. Augustin's Commentaries upon the Holy Scripture; because they contain such Precepts and Rules as he thought were to be observed, both for the understanding and the explaining of the Scriptures: He began this Work soon after he was Consecrated, about the Year 397. but he stop'd at the 36th. Chapter of the Third Book; and afterwards added the rest of this Book with the Fourth in 426. as he says himself in his Retractations; where he makes two Remarks upon that Work. 1. That it is not certain, as he affirmed, That the Wisdom of Solomon was written by Jesus the Son of Syrach, the Author of Ecclesiasticus. 2. That when he saith, That the Old Testament containeth 44 Books, he used that word in the sence of the Church; though St. Paul seems to understand by the Old Testament no more than the Law given upon Mount Sinai; He confesseth likewise, That he committed a Fault of memory, in quoting one of St. Ambrose's Books for another.

In the Preface to this Work, he answereth three sorts of Persons who might find fault with it; Some, because they did not understand it; Others, because they could not make use of the Precepts and Rules which he gives to understand, and to expound the Scripture; and the last, because they understand and expound the Holy Scripture without making use of his Rules, only by the light of the Holy Ghost. He tells the First and Second, That it is not his fault if they want Understanding or Light. And the Third, That they ought not to judge of others by them∣selves, since God hath not granted the same Gifts to all Men: and that we should tempt him, if we neglected those Humane means which God affords us to understand the Holy Scripture, un∣der pretence that he can give us that knowledge, without either Study or Labour.

The design of this Book is, as we have observed, to give Rules and Precepts, both to Under∣stand and to Explain the Holy Scripture. These two divide the whole Work. He treateth in the Three first Books of the Understanding of the Scripture; and in the last, of the way to Ex∣pound it, and make it intelligible to others.

The First Book contains loose Reflections and general Principles. He observes at first, That all Knowledge is either of Signs or of Things; and that Things are expressed by Signs. He di∣stinguisheth two sorts of Things; some which we may enjoy, and others which we are only to use. The three Persons of the Divinity, are the only Thing we are to enjoy. They are that ineffable God, whom we look upon as the Supreme Being, as the immutable Wisdom to be preferred before all Things; to know him, we must Purifie our Minds: And to teach us this, the Wisdom of God was incarnate; it is that which Cures Man of his Distempers, Weaknesses, and Blindness. He confirmed our Faith by his Resurrection and Ascension; and he increases and upholdeth it by the Hope of Reward, the Fear of Punishment, and by the Expectation of the Last Judgment. He hath established a Church, to which he hath granted necessary Gifts and Graces to lead Men to their Heavenly Country. He gave it Keys to bind Sinners, and to loose them that are Penitent. As for created Beings, we are not permitted to enjoy them; that is to say, to esteem them as our Ultimate End; but we may use them, and they ought to be loved with respect to God. Thus we are to love both our Selves and our Neighbour. The Scripture commands us not to love our Selves; we are but too prone to this naturally, but it enjoyns us to love our Neighbour. The whole Law centers in this twofold Charity, which makes us love God above all things, and our Neighbour as our selves. Our Charity to∣wards our Neighbour ought to be regulated: We must not love Sinners as Sinners, but as Men; and though we are more strictly obliged to succour those that are near to us, whether by Kindred or Friendship, yet we ought to love all Men alike, because they are our Neighbours; even Angels are to be comprehended under this general Name. St. Augustin having laid down these Principles, saith, That the double Precept of Charity, is to be a Rule for the understand∣ing of the Holy Scriptures. That any sence that hath no relation to Charity, is not certainly the true sence; but on the contrary, every sence which hath respect to it, is useful; though not always conformable to the Writer's intention; and yet we should endeavour not to depart from their particular meaning. He saith, in the last place, That the understanding of the Scripture is comprised in Faith, Hope, and Charity; So that a Christian who is endued with these three Vertues, hath no absolute need of the Scripture for himself; but only for the In∣struction of others: Yea, That several Persons live very Christian Lives in their Solitude with∣out the help of the Sacred Books. He concludes from all that he hath said in this Book, That whosoever is throughly perswaded, that the Scripture is that Charity which proceedeth out of a pure Heart, of a good Conscience and Faith unfeigned, may without fear betake himself to the reading of the Holy Scripture.

In the Second Book, he comes to the Knowledge of Signs; and having given the Definition, and Divisions of them, he observes, That Words hold the First place among Signs. He shows how the Sound of VVords is formed, and how the variety of Tongues was introduced into the VVorld. He supposes that the Scripture is not plain every where; and that there is need of

Application to understand it; that the most Skilful meet with Difficulties; that the Allegories and Figures, there to be met with, sometimes render it dark; but commonly what is obscure in one place, is cleared in another; and so the Holy Ghost feeds the Hungry with what is clear, and prevents their being nauseated by exercising them with what is obscure. He sheweth, at last, by what Degrees we may attain to the perfect Knowledge of the VVisdom, contained in the Holy Scripture. These Degrees are, The Fear of God, Piety, Knowledge, Courage, Counsel, and Purity of Heart. Afterwards followeth a Catalogue of the Canonical Books, * 1.154 the very same with ours. The Rule he makes use of to distinguish them, is this. I desire (saith he) that to know the Canonical Books, the Authority of the greatest part of the Catho∣lick Church may be observed, and particularly of those that have Apostolical Sees, or which have had the Happiness of receiving the Epistles of the Apostles. But among the Canonical Books, those that are received by all Churches, must be preferred be∣fore those which are rejected by some. Again, among those we should pay a greater regard to those which are acknowledged by a great number of Churches, and by the most considerable, than to such as are admitted only by few Churches, and those of no great Authority. And if some have been received by the greater Num∣ber of Churches, and rejected by those that have greater Autho∣rity; though it is hard to meet with such, yet they ought to be put in the same Rank, and to obtain the same Authority. He adviseth all Pious Persons, that fear God, and seek to know his VVill, to read all the Canonical Books, to draw from them Precepts for Manners, and Rules of Faith, and at last, he furnisheth them with the means to arrive to the understanding of hard and obscure Passages. The First is the Knowledge of that Lan∣guage, wherein those Books were written. The Second is to consult and compare the several Translations, whereof some serve to explain the rest. Among the Translations, he preferrs the Vulgar Latin, as being more literal, and clearer: And among the Greek Versions, he adheres to the Septuagint, to which he ascribes much Authority. He doth not decide, Whether the Seventy composed it separately, every one in his Cell by God's Inspiration, or by conferring to∣gether. But he affirms, That however it was composed, it ought to be followed, and prefer∣red even before the Hebrew Text, because it is not credible, that they made this alteration, without a secret Assistance of the Holy Spirit, for the good of the Church. As to the Books of the New Testament, he saith, That, without doubt, the Latin Translation is to be Cor∣rected by the Greek Copies.

The Third Thing which St. Augustin looks upon as necessary for the understanding of the Scripture, is the Knowledge of Things signified; as the Nature of Animals, Plants, Herbs, and of other Things which are made use of in Comparisons and Figures in Holy Scripture. He lays great weight upon the Knowledge of Numbers, and Musick, which he pretends to be of great use: And he would not have Profane Sciences neglected; provided, that such as are False, and Superstitious, be laid aside; and particularly, judicial Astrology, and Magick. He reckoneth Painting, and Mythology, among those Things whose Knowledge is Superflu∣ous; but he shews the usefulness of History, Mechanicks, Logick, Rhetorick, and other Sci∣ences, provided that a good Use be made of them, that Men depend not too much upon them, nor be lifted up because of them, but that both Charity, and Humility, be preserved as the Two Keys, without which the Holy Scripture cannot be understood.

The Third Book lays down Rules to clear those Difficulties that arise from the different Sen∣ces, in which a Discourse may be taken; as for instance, when the Parts of a Discourse are distinguished by Points, and Comma's, which variously placed, alter the Sence. St. Augustin would have Men referr themselves, in such cases, to the Rule of Faith, and reject that Distin∣ction which makes an Heretical Sence: That if both Sences be Catholick, that is to be fol∣lowed, which agreeth best with the connexion of the Discourse; and last of all, if both agree with the Text, then we may follow that which seems most probable. He applies the same Rules to determine the pronunciation, and signification of undetermin'd Terms: At last he desireth, that Men should consult the original Text.

There is much more difficulty, when the Words are taken in a Metaphorical, and Figura∣tive Sence; then we must have a care how we understand them in a Proper, and Natural Sence. The Jews were for a long time, Slaves to this literal Meaning. The Gentiles like∣wise were Slaves to unprofitable Ceremonies. But Christians deliver the Jews, by discovering to them the Truths that were hid under the Letter, and they set the Gentiles at Liberty, by utterly rejecting their profane Ceremonies. Themselves are charged but with a small Number of Signs easily practised, whose Signification is very Majestical, and their Observation very Pure. Christ himself instituted them, and the Apostles taught the Church the Knowledge of them: Such are the Sacrament of Baptism, and the Celebration of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.

After this, St. Augustin goes to the necessary Rules, whereby we may distinguish the proper Sence from the Figurative. The First, and most general is, That whatsoever cannot be made to agree, either with Purity of Manners, or with the Truth of Faith, when 'tis understood ac∣cording

to the Letter, must necessarily have a Figurative Sence. But we are not to judge of what may be Pure, or True, according to the Prejudices, either of Custom, or Opinion, but only by the Rules of Faith, and Charity, because the Holy Scripture teacheth nothing but Cha∣rity, and condemns nothing but Lust.

Neither must those Opinions, and Actions, be taken in a Figurative Sence, which seem to imply a kind of Cruelty, which in Scripture, is ascribed either to God, or to Righteous Men, when they are made use of against the Lusts of carnal Men. But a Word, or an Action which is absolutely unjust, and that cannot be excused by any Circumstance, when it is attributed to God, or to those whose Sanctity is commended in Scripture, must necessarily be expounded by a Figure. This Rule takes place in Things that are expressed in the Form of a Command. If the Letter forbids a Crime, and enjoins a good Thing, there is no Figure; but, on the con∣trary, if it seems to command a Crime, and forbid a Vertue, it is a Figure. It often happe∣neth, that such as are in a more perfect State, do understand Figuratively, what is said of a State less Perfect; but let those Men consider, that there are Precepts for all Men in general, and some that relate to each State in particular. He adds, That we should not believe, that since the Coming of Jesus Christ, those Things can be observed, which were either permitted, or prescribed only for the time of the Old Law, though at that time, they were to be taken in their proper Sence. He instanceth in the Polygamy of the Patriarchs, because they lived Holily in Marriage, with a prospect of having Children; and he confidently preferreth that State, before that of such Men, who having but one VVife, abuse Matrimony to satisfie their brutish Lust.

Finally, it must be confessed, That when the Scripture mentions great Men's Faults, we may not only seek there for a Figurative Sence, but also for Instruction in the Historical Sence, because their Fall teaches the Holyest Men, not to be lifted up through Presump∣tion.

St. Augustin addeth, besides the following Observations, that the same Figurative Expres∣sion sometimes signifies Two different Things, and sometimes contrary Things. That a dark Place of Scripture ought to be explained by those that are clearer; and that Reasonings may likewise be used to clear it: But it is safer to have recourse to other Passages of Scripture; and that the same Passage may have several Significations equally good. He concludes with the Seven Rules of Tychonius, the Donatist; but they are very far from the good Sence, and the Usefulness of St. Augustin's: They discover great Subtilty; but it is very difficult to apply them.

In the last Book of Christian Doctrine, St. Augustin shows how to Expound the Holy Scrip∣ture for the benefit of others. He says at first, That they were not to expect Rhetorical Rules upon that Subject from him; which though they are not useless, yet since they may be found in other places, they ought not to be introduced into this Work; He enlargeth however upon the Qualifications of a Christian Orator. He shews, That it were an Errour to think, that Truth cannot make use of Rhetorical Ornaments to refute Errour; so that he would have Christians study to speak Eloquently. He adviseth young Men to learn the Precepts and Rules of Art; but as for Men in Years, his Opinion is, That they should only read Books that are well written, and frame their Discourses after their Pattern, without regarding the Precepts of Art, which are of little use. The Design of a Preacher who expounds the Holy Scripture, who sets forth God's VVord, who defends the Faith, and opposes Errours, should be to teach that which is Good, and to perswade others to depart from that which is Evil; to bring over those of contrary Opinions, to quicken the Sloathfnl, to instruct the Ignorant, to soften, and convert hardned Sinners.

VVhen the Question is only how to instruct the Ignorant, it is enough to declare the Do∣ctrine of the Church; but if Gain-sayers are to be perswaded, it must be established by solid Arguments: And Lastly, If Men's Hearts are to be moved, there is need of Prayers, Reproa∣ches, Threatnings, Exhortations, and other Figures proper to affect them. Such as want Eloquence to excel in these Things, ought to make up their Discourses with Passages, and Ex∣pressions out of Holy Scripture. He proves by several Examples, That there is much Elo∣quence in the Holy VVritings; yet he would not have a Preacher imitate that Obscure∣ness which is to be met with in some Passages of the Holy Scripture, but charges him, above all things, to be clear; not to content himself to please with agreeable Notions, but to in∣form by solid Instructions. As the Matter which a Preacher treateth of is high, so he ought never to lose his Gravity, though he may alter his Stile according to the variety of Subjects. St. Augustin produces Examples, both out of the Holy Scripture, and out of the Fathers, of Three kinds of Eloquence; shewing, at the same time, upon what Occasions, and to what Subjects they are to be apply'd. Lastly, Having laid down several useful Rules to compleat a Preacher, he advises him, above all, to prepare himself by Prayer, and to be sure that his Life be answerable to his Sermons. He blames not those who Preach Sermons composed by others, when they cannot make Sermons themselves.

After this Treatise of Christian Doctrine, follows St. Augustin's Writings upon the Holy Scripture.

The First is his imperfect Book upon Genesis. It is the First, not only according to the Order of the Books of the Holy Scripture, but also according to that of its Composition. St. Augustin

wrote it in Africa in the Year 393. before he was Bishop. He designed to prove against the Manichees, That the History of Genesis, taken literally, was no ridiculous thing, as they pre∣tended: But he confesses; That being not well instructed in those Matters, he found this Un∣dertaking to be above his strength; which obliged him to stop in the way, even before he had finished the First Book, which remained imperfect. He was once resolved utterly to suppress it; but he thought it more convenient to leave it as a monument of his First Enquiries upon the Holy Scripture, and he added some Periods to it. He begins this Book with an Account of the Doctrine of the Church, concerning the Trinity, and the Incarnation. He adds against the Manichees, That Sin is none of God's Creatures, but that it consists in the Abuse of Free-Will. Afterwards he distinguishes Four Sences of the Scripture: The Historical, which takes place when a Relation is made of Matters of Fact, as they happen'd: The Allegorical, which ex∣plaineth what is spoken by Figures: The Analogical, when the Old and New Testament are compared together, and their Agreement is justified: And the Aetiological, whereby Reasons are given of the Actions and Discourses that are related in the Holy Scripture.

This being supposed, he undertakes to Explain the History of the Creation, set forth in the beginning of Genesis. He frames Difficulties upon every Word, and makes several Objections to himself, but often answers them not; or if he doth, his Answers are not commonly very just, nor sufficient to satisfie the least scrupulous. This Work endeth at Man's Creation.

He pursues very near the same Method in the Twelve following Books upon Genesis, which he writ when he was Bishop: They were begun in 401. and compleated in 415. He explains the Text of Genesis from the beginning, to that place where it is said that Adam was driven out of Paradise. He examines the Words, and starts an infinite number of Questions: some he answers, but most are left unresolved. He often gives Mystical and Moral Solutions, which are not very literal. He discourses likewise by the bye, of several common places, concerning the Nature both of Angels, and of the Soul; the Fall of Angels, and that of Man; concerning the Mysteries of the Number Six; concerning Hell and Paradise, Visions, and several other Subjects which he meets with in his way.

The Seven Books of the Ways of Speaking, in the seven first Books of the Bible, which fol∣low this Work we have now spoken of, is a Critical Treatise; wherein St. Augustin explaineth several VVays of Speaking that are peculiar to these Books, and which ordinarily are not met with in others. This VVork is of the Year 419.

In making these Remarks upon the VVays of Speech, in these Seven First Books of the Bible, he finds several Difficulties about the things themselves, which he collecteth in the Form of Questions, which he proposeth to himself; whereof he gives a Solution in few words, though without going to the depth. This is both the Subject and the Method of the Seven fol∣lowing Books: where he takes a short view of the principal Difficulties that he met with in the Pentateuch, in the Book of Joshua, and in that of Judges. This is a very curious and useful VVork. There he does not recede from the literal Sence, as in his other Treatises, but makes very learned and judicious Remarks, which serve very much to clear the Text of the Bible.

The Notes upon Job are a very imperfect VVork. St. Augustin had writ them in the Margin of a Copy of the Book of Job; from which some body took them, and compiled them into a Book by themselves: which makes him say, That he knew not whether it was to be called his VVork or theirs who had thus collected and reduced them. He findeth there much Obscu∣rity, proceeding from their great Brevity, and because they added some Notes to those words of the Text to which they do not referr. In one word: He found so many Faults in that VVork, that he had suppressed it, had he not known that there were several Copies of it abroad. This is the Account which he gives of it in the 13th. Chapter of the Second Book of his Re∣tractations. Yet this Treatise is not so contemptible; it is a kind of Paraphrase, or literal Ex∣plication of the Book of Job, which explains it, and discovers such Notions as may be further improved.

The Looking-glass taken out of the Scripture, is neither a Commentary, nor a particular VVork upon the Scripture, but barely a Collection of Passages out of the Old and New Testa∣ment, containing Precepts and Instructions for Manners. Possidius affirms, That St. Augustin wrote a Book of this Nature, and Cassiodorus recommends the reading of it. It is not certain whether this is that which St. Augustin wrote. The Preface is in his Style, but in the Body of the Book the Scriptures are cited according to St. Jerom's Translation. Perhaps the Text used by St. Augustin was changed, and the more common Version was put in the room of it: For I can hardly believe that St. Augustin would quit his Old Translation, to make a constant use of St. Jerom's. Father Vignier hath also published A Looking-glass taken out of Scripture, attri∣buted to St. Augustin: But this relates to Doctrine, more than to Manners; which doth not agree with what Possidius saith of St. Augustin's.

These are all St. Augustin's Treatises upon the Old Testament, which make up the First Part of the Third Tome. The Second contains Treatises upon the New Testament, and begins with a Harmony betwixt the Four Gospels divided into Four Books.

In the First, having spoken of the Number, Authority, and of the Style of the Gospels, he refuteth those who refuse to give Credit to the Gospel, because it was not written by Jesus Christ himself, but by his Disciples, whom they suppose to have receded from their Master's

Doctrine, that so they might persuade the VVorld that he was God, and thereby destroy the VVorship of the Gods. He observes, That Two of the Four Evangelists were Apostles, St. Matthew and St. John; and Two were not, St. Mark and St. Luke; that so none might say, that there was a difference betwixt those who had seen with their Eyes Christ's Actions, and those who wrote them upon the Relation of those who had seen them. He addeth, That other Men's VVorks, who undertook to write the History of Christ, were not received by the Church as Canonical; because the Authors of these Histories were not to be believed, having stufft their Works with false Relations, and Errors, contrary to the Rule of the Catholick and Apostolick Faith, and to sound Doctrine. He believes, That the Four Gospels were composed in the same Order as we see them in at present: That St. Matthew's Gospel was written in Hebrew, and the others in Greek: That each Evangelist hath observed a particular Order, yet without obliging himself not to speak any thing that had been spoken by another: That St. Matthew designed particu∣larly to give an Account of Christ's Royal Descent, and to represent him according to that Humane Life which he led among Men: That St. Mark did little else but abridge St. Matthew: That St. Luke apply'd himself to set forth Christ's Priesthood; which is the reason why he doth not reckon his Genealogy from King David, by Solomon, as St. Matthew doth, but by Nathan: and for the same reason, he takes notice, That the Virgin Mary was a-Kin to Elizabeth, who was of the Sacerdotal Race, and Wife to Zacharias the Priest. Lastly, That St. John taketh his Subject above Christ's Humane Actions, to speak of his Divinity, and to discover the Equality of the Word with his Father: So that it may be said, that the Three First Evangelists are more for the Active Life, and St. John for Contemplation. After this, St. Augustin makes Application of the Four Beasts in the Revelations to the Four Evangelists; and having made these Remarks, he answereth those who found fault that Christ had written nothing. He proposes to them the Examples of Socrates, Pythagoras, and of the wisest Heathen, who left to their Disciples the care of committing to Writing both their Doctrine and their Instructions. He shews, That Christ cannot be said to have written Magical Books, or that he approved the Worship of False Deities. He particularly enlargeth upon this last Head, shewing, That the Apostle's Doctrine, touching the Worshipping of One only God, is conformable to that of the Prophets, who fore-told, That the Messiah should preach the same upon Earth, and that it should be published and received throughout the VVorld. The Three other Books, are a Harmony of the Evangelists. In the Second and Third, he followeth the Text of St. Matthew's Gospel, and compareth the three other Gospels with that. In the last, he takes notice of what the three other Evangelists have peculiar to themselves. He doth not only compare the Text of the Evangelists, but makes them agree together, and resolves the seeming Difficulties and Contrarieties that are be∣twixt them, as to the Order and Manner of their relating both of the Words and Actions of Jesus Christ. This Work was very difficult and laborious, and it was finished by St. Augustin with great exactness. It was composed about the Year 400.

After this Treatise, we find in this Volume the two Books of St. Augustin, upon the Sermon of Christ in the Mount, written about the Year 393. They contain Moral Reflections, with In∣structions and Precepts contained in Christ's Sermon, recorded by St. Matthew in the 5th. 6th. and 7th. Chapters of his Gospel. St. Augustin likewise clears the Difficulties that he meets with in the Letter of the Text. Among the Passages of this Treatise which he reviseth in his Retracta∣tions, there are Two of Consequence: The former, is, about the Divorce allow'd by Jesus Christ, in case of Fornication. He had extended what is said of Fornication, to all those Crimes that set us at a distance from God. Here he retracteth this Opinion, and confesseth, That this Notion is not very certain. He saith also, That it is a very hard Question, VVhether a Man may Marry another VVife, having been Divorced from a former? The Second Point of any im∣portance, taken notice of in his Retractations, is, touching an Expression he had used when he spake of Jesus Christ: He had called him Homo Dominicus: He disapproves that Term, though he had read it in Ecclesiastical VVriters. He retracts likewise what he had said, That the Sin unto Death, was Envy against our Brother: with some other Explications that were not very just. However, the Treatise it self is very instructive, and very useful: It contains several Mo∣ral Precepts, which may be of very great Use. In the Second Book, he explains the Lord's Prayer.

Both the Books of Questions upon some Passages of St. Matthew's and St. Luke's Gospels, were composed by St. Augustin with great precipitation, to satisfie the Requests of a Person that read the Gospel. Most of his Answers are either Mystical or Moral Explications. He places this Book in his Retractations, among those which he writ about the Year 400. and takes notice of some Faults of Inadvertency. The First Book is upon St. Matthew's Gospel. The Second, upon that of St. Luke. He makes no mention of the Seventeen following Questions upon St. Matthew's Gospel, neither are they mentioned in the best Editions of the Catalogue of St. Augustin's VVorks, made by Possidius: which gives us reason to doubt whether they are St. Augustin's, though Rhabanus hath quoted them under his Name, and though they are writ∣ten in a Style very much like his.

The 124 Treatises upon St. John's Gospel are of a very different Nature from the former; they are Homilies preached by St. Augustin to his People, wherein he followeth the Text of St. John, and draws important Instructions from it upon the principal Points both of Doctrine and Morality. He attacks three sorts of Hereticks principally; the Arians, the Donatists, and the

Pelagians. He maintains against the First, the Divinity and Consubstantiality of the VVord. He oftens refutes the Reasons alledged by the Second to justifie their Separation, and earnestly ex∣horts them to re-unite themselves with the Church; and proves against the last, the necessity of Christ's Grace, and the free Predestination of the Elect. These are the principal Subjects treated of in these Homilies, which he preached after the Pelagian Heresie broke out, before the Destruction of the Donatists Schi••••, some time after they had found St. Steven's Body, as he affirms in the 120th. Sermon; which makes us conjecture that they are the Sermons which he preached to his People in the Years 416. and 417. For he began with them about the end of VVinter, towards February, in the Year 416. as appears by the beginning of the Sixth: He continued them in Lent, as it is observed in the 10th. and 11th. They were interrupted during Easter Holy-days. After the Holy-days he undertook the Exposition of St. John's Epistle, and then prosecuted his Gospel. He had got but to the 27th. Homily, about the Feast of St. Lawrence, and so could not finish these Sermons before the next Year.

St. Augustin's Ten Homilies upon St. John's Epistle, interrupted, as we said just now, the course of those which he composed upon the Gospel. He gives notice of it himself in his Pre∣face; where he observes, That having been obliged by the Solemnity of those Festivals, wherein particular Lessons are yearly recited, to interrupt the course of his Explications upon St. John's Gospel; before he returned to it, he thought it convenient to Expound, during those seven or eight Days, the Epistle of the same Evangelist, that was most agreeable to that joyful Time, because it speaks of nothing but Charity. St. Augustin, in his Homilies, makes excellent Re∣flections upon this Vertue. He observes, That Fear brings in Charity, but that Charity drives away Fear. He distinguisheth two sorts of Fear; that which is conceived by a dread of Punish∣ment, which goes before Charity; and that which he calleth a Chaste Fear, which consists in the Fear of Losing Charity. He explaineth these two sorts of Fear, by the different Disposi∣tions of two VVomen, whereof the one loveth her Husband, and the other hateth him, though both Fear him. There are other excellent Instructions in these Homilies of St. Augustin, concern∣ing the Love of God and our Neighbour. He speaks also occasionally, concerning Grace and the Church:

And expounds these words of Christ to St. Peter, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, of the Faith whereof St. Peter had immediately before made Profession.

St. Augustin composed at Carthage, in 394. his Exposition of several Passages of the Epistle to the Romans, in Answer to the Difficulties that were proposed to him. He had not then per∣fectly found his System of Grace, which made him let slip some Explications different from some which he hath given since: And this very thing gave Occasion for his Remarks upon this Book, in his Retractations, where he corrects what he had said, whereby some might be made to believe, That the Beginning of Faith cometh from Man, and not from the Grace of Jesus Christ.

He undertook also at the same time a larger Commentary upon this whole Epistle; which would have been prodigiously large, since the single Exposition of the Salutation with which St. Paul begins the Epistle, makes up a whole Book. True it is, that he makes there a Digres∣sion of several Pages, upon an incidental Question concerning the Sin against the Holy Ghost, which he thinks to be final Impenitency; but both the Extent and the Difficulty of that Work made him give it over: however, he left that Book, and entituled it, The Beginning of an Ex∣position upon the Epistle to the Romans.

At the same time likewise he made a continued Commentary upon the Epistle to the Gala∣tians, wherein he contents himself with clearing the whole Text, with Explications and Re∣flections, without departing from his Subject by long Digressions.

The Addition at the latter end of this Volume, containeth several Discourses upon the Scrip∣ture, which are none of St. Augustin's.

The First is intituled, Of the Miracles of the Holy Scripture, contained in the Old and New Te∣stament. One needs only read one or two Periods of this VVork, to be convinced that it is not St. Augustin's; so different is the Style thereof from that of this Father: The Author thereof seems to have been either an Englishman or an Irishman. He speaks of the Flowing and Ebbing of the Sea upon the Coasts of the British Islands; and to express the same, he makes use of Terms that were usual in Bede's time, he fixes the time where he lived in the 4th. Chapter of the 2d, Book; and speaking of those Islands, he shews, That he wrote after the Year 660. This VVork is divided into Three Books: The First contains the Miracles related in the Historical Books of the Old Testament. The Second, Those that are contained in the Books of the Pro∣phets, And the Last, Those that are mentioned in the New Testament. It is ill written, and of very little use.

The small Discourse of the Benedictions of the Patriarch Jacob, belongs not to St. Augustin but is a Fragment of Alcuinus's Questions upon Genesis; who took part of it from the Questions upon Genesis, and part from the Morals of St. Gregory, This very Book is found in the 3d. Book of the Commentary upon Genesis, attributed to St. Eucherius, Bishop of Lyons.

VVe have observed already, speaking of the VVorks of Hilary the Deacon, in the Second Vo∣lume of this Bibliotheca, that the Questions upon the Old and the New Testament, are not St. Augustin's; and the Conjectures, for which they were ascribed to Hilary the Deacon, were there set down: He that desires more Arguments to prove, That they are not St. Augustin's, should read the First Part of the Benedictines Preface to this Treatise. It remains only, That

we take notice with them, That in all probability these Questions are not at all written by the same Author. In some Manuscripts there are only the 127 Questions, which were published at first; others have 151. but in these, there are not all those that are in the first Manuscript; and among the rest the 44th. and the 115th. which afforded Conjectures concerning the Age and the Country of their Author. This makes it difficult to affirm any thing certainly concerning the Author of these Questions.

The Explication of the Apocalypse, which is the last Book that is added to this Volume of St. Augustin, is a Collection of Notes upon the Revelations, taken out of the Commentaries of Victorinus, Primasius, and Bede, and disposed into the Form of Homilies. Those that thought that this was the Commentary of Tychonius the Donatist, upon the Revelations, did not take notice that it was so far from containing things favourable to the Donatists Sect; That on the contrary, it refutes their Errors, and particularly that of Rebaptization, in the Sixth Homily upon the Revelations, Vers. 11. Neither do we find here, those Expositions which Bede men∣tions as written by Tychonius; nor the long Dissertation, to prove, That the Angels spoken of in the Revelations, are those Churches which Tychonius had inserted into his Commentary; as St. Augustin observes in the Thirtieth Chapter of the Third Book of Christian Doctrine.

The FOURTH TOME.

THE Fourth Tome of St. Augustin's Works contains This Father's Explications upon the * 1.155 Psalms; which make too large a Book, to be comprised in one Volume with his other Commentaries upon the Holy Scripture. He composed them not in that order wherein we find them, but some at one time, and others at another; and not all after the same manner. Some are Commentaries written in his Study, and the others, which make by far the greater number, are Discourses made to his People. Cassiodore observes, That in his time they were divided into Fifteen Decads; this division is not observed at present, and it is not likely that St. Augustin made it. St. Augustin understanding no Hebrew, followed the Latin Translations made from the Greek Version of the Septuagint, to the Text whereof he often referrs. In some of these Explications, and particularly, in those that were not written to the People, as the Thirteen first, he only makes Allegorical Notes upon the Text of the Psalms; but in the rest, he is either very diffuse, and enlargeth much upon Reflections that are not very solid, or else he goeth from his Subject by long Digressions. He professes to explain the Letter, but his literal sence is almost always Spiritual or Moral. If he clears any term, or insists upon the Signification of any word, it is always to extract an Allegory, or something Moral from it. He brings all to Jesus Christ, to the Mysteries of our Religion, and to the Church. The Recompences and Blessings mentioned in the Psalms, are always in his opinion, Spiritual Recompences and Eternal Blessings. He often gives several sences of the same place, and very frequently makes a digression against the Schism, or the Heresies of his own time; He is full of useless Allusions, ill-grounded Sub∣tilties, and improbable Allegories. His very Moral Thoughts are seldom such as might have been naturally inferred from the Scripture Text; but ordinarily such far-fetch'd Notions as could never fall into the Mind of any Man that should read the Text.

Yet here and there one may meet with lively and fervent Exhortations, which raised his Peo∣ple; and profitable Instructions upon the most important Truths of Religion. So that though this Work cannot pass for a good Commentary upon the Psalms, yet it may be looked upon as a wonderful Collection of Christian and Moral Notions; and if it be of no great use for those that enquire after the literal sence of the Scripture; yet it will prove very Profitable to Prea∣chers, who desire to fit their Minds with necessary Thoughts and Rules to help them to dis∣charge well that part of their Ministery.

The FIFTH TOME.

MOst of St. Augustin's Sermons being Homilies upon the Scripture, they are with a great * 1.156 deal of Reason brought in to make up this Volume, which follows immediately after St. Augustin's Commentaries upon the Holy Scripture. They had hitherto been in great confu∣sion, because new Collections of them were still Printed, as new Sermons were discovered. There was a great number of Supposititious or Doubtful ones among the True; most Editions were full of Faults, so that it was necessary, that Persons so exact, learned, and versed in such Matters as these Benedictines are, should undertake to set them in order, to distinguish St. Au∣gustin's from those that are Supposititious, and to Correct the Text from the best and ancientest Manuscripts. This they have performed most happily in the Fifth Tome, which containeth all St. Augustin's Sermons, placed in very good order, and divided into five Classes.

The First containeth 183 Sermons upon several Passages both of the Old and New Te∣stament.

The Second is made up of 88 Sermons upon the great Festivals of the Year.

In the Third are 69 upon the Festivals of the Saints.

The Fourth comprehendeth 23 upon various Subjects, as, The Love of God, Fear, Penance, Contempt of the World, Behaviour of the Clergy, Peace and Concord, Resurrection from the * 1.157 Dead, &c.

The last Classis is composed of such Sermons, as cannot be certainly affirm'd to be St. Augustin's, though there is no certainty that they are none of his; among these, there are some of which we have more reason to doubt, which are Printed in a smaller Character; there are not above 31 of them.

They have also added at the latter end, Fragments of some other Sermons of St. Augustin's, which are taken out of the Collections of Eugyppius, Bede, Florus, and John a Deacon of the Church of Rome: Another Fragment, of the Sermon upon the Ascension, and a Sermon of Heraclius, a Disciple of St. Augustin's.

The Addition contains 317 Spurious Sermons, divided into four Classes, according to the order observed in the true ones; At the Head of each, is a very exact Critick; Several of them are restored to Caesarius their true Author; Some are found to belong to Rhabanus, and some others are taken out of Origen's Homilies, or out of the Works of St. Cyprian, St. Ambrose, St. Maximus, St. Leo, Faustus, St. Gregory, Alcuinus, and Ivo Carnutensis.

St. Augustin's Sermons are written neither Artificially nor Methodically, They are not regular Orations composed of all their Parts; They are familiar Discourses, spoken without much Pre∣paration; Most of them are very short, and made up of concise Sentences and Phrases; He doth not go to the depth of Points either of Doctrine or Morality, as the Greek Fathers do, but contents himself to speak of them succinctly, and in few words. Interrogations, Antitheses, and Quibbles, are almost all the Figures that he beautifies his Discourse withal; He doth not assert the Truth strongly, nor inculcate it Pathetically; but barely proposes it with agreeable Expressions, and impresses it with some pleasant Thoughts. This kind of Eloquence is much inferior to that of the Greek Orators, but it may be that it relished best with the Men of St. Au∣gustin's Age, and agreed with the Genius of the Africans; who not only admired his Sermons, but were moved by them. It would not be so now, and I question whether a Sermon of St. Au∣gustin's preached in our Pulpits would draw many Auditors: Yet it must be confessed, That few Latin Preachers are to be compared with him, and that if he be much inferior to the St. Basils, or the St. Chrysostomes, he is much above the St. Maximus's, the St. Chrysologus's, and several other Latins that came after him. I shall not enter into particulars upon his Sermons, which were both a tedious and an endless Work.

The SIXTH TOME.

THE Sixth Tome of St. Augustin's Works contains his Dogmatical Books, upon several * 1.158 Points both of Morality, and Discipline: He begins with some small Treatises, containing Answers to several Questions upon various Subjects.

The First, Is a Collection of Answers to 83 Questions, which he resolved, after his return into Africa, about the Year 388. and which he Collected after he was a Bishop. These are the Re∣solutions contained in those 83 Questions, with most of the Principles from whence they are taken:

I. The Soul is not of its self, nor by its self; since it is not essentially the Truth.

II. God did not make Man like himself. He is not good by Nature, but by Will; therefore he must be free.

III. If a Wise Man's Advice never makes another man worse than he was before, Is it credi∣ble, That God should make Men more wicked?

IV. What then may be the Cause of Man's Wickedness? We must seek for it, either in him∣self, or in others, or in nothing: Consider it well, and you will find, That the Will of Man is the Cause of his Depravation.

V. Animals have no Knowledge, and therefore cannot be Happy.

VI. All Corporeal and Spiritual Beings, have a Perfection which makes their Essence: Evil hath none; therefore it is no Being.

VII. Sometimes we confound the Soul with the Spirit, and sometimes we distinguish them: when the Actions of Man that are common to him with Beasts, are attributed to his Soul, the Spirit cannot be meant by that term; for Beasts have no Reason: and Reason is a necessary Adjunct of a Spirit.

VIII. The Soul hath no other Motion besides its Will and its Actions; It makes the Body change its place, but changes not her self.

IX. Our Senses only acquaint us with those Things that are in a perpetual change; There∣fore they cannot give us the Knowledge of Eternal and Immoveable Truth.

X. Whatsoever hath any Perfection cometh from God: Bodies have; Therefore God is the Author of them.

XI. Jesus Christ was Man; but he is Born of a Virgin: Who can doubt then of his being come to save both Sexes?

XII. God may be present, indeed; yet a defiled Soul cannot see him: This Notion is not St. Augustin's, but an Heathen's called Fonteius; who was afterwards Baptized, and died a * 1.159 Christian; as St. Augustin assures us in his Retractations.

XIII. Man can tame and dress a Beast; but do we find that Beasts can do the same to Man?

XIV. If Christ's Body had been but a Phantome, Christ had deceived us; but he is not capa∣ble of so doing.

XV. The Spirit of Man comprehends it self; and knows no infinite Perfection in it self: wherefore it is finite.

XVI. The Time past, is no more; The Future is not yet: Every thing is present with God.

XVII. There should be three Causes of a Creature; That which gives it a Being; That which gives it such a sort of Being; and that which gives it a Love to its Being: Therefore the Cause of it is a Trinity. This Argument is not the most convincing.

XVIII. In Eternity, there is neither time past nor to come, all is present.

XIX. God is no where, and comprehends all things, without being the place of any thing; for he could not be in a place, nor be a place, without being Corporeal.

XX. Since God is the Author of Being, he cannot be the Author of what tends to nothing. Evil tends to nothing; therefore God is not the Author of Evil.

XXI. The only reason why we need any thing, is a defect in our selves; God therefore needs nothing.

XXII. Man is wise, because he partaketh of wisdom; but God is wise through Wisdom it self. It is the same in all other Perfections.

XXIII. If any thing should happen in the World by chance, then there would be no longer Prudence; but there is a necessity of Prudence: for all Beings are perfect, but can no further be so, than as they participate of the Goodness and Perfection of God. God and Man are the Authors of all that is done in the VVorld. Good and Evil depend upon our own VVills.

XXIV. It was the part of VVisdom to show that the most shameful Death is not to be feared: And that's one of the Reasons for which Christ endured such a one.

XXV. There are Sins of Weakness, Ignorance and Malice; Weakness is contrary to the Strength of God, Ignorance to his VVisdom, and Malice to his Goodness: Thus whosoever knows what God's Strength and VVisdom are, may know which are Venial Sins: And who∣soever knows God's Goodness, knoweth also what, those Sins are which deserve to be punished both in this VVorld and in the next. This well understood, ought to be a Rule whereby to judge what sort of Sinners should be obliged to do Publick Penance, though they confess their Sins. Yet this Rule is very general and very equivocal.

XXVI. God makes use of the VVi••ked both to punish and to help. Afflictions are an Exer∣cise to the Righteous, and a Punishment to the VVicked. Rest and Peace corrupt the VVicked, and sanctifie the Righteous. God makes use of Men to accomplish the designs of his Provi∣dence, though they know it not. VVe act our selves when we follow God's Commandments; but in all other things God guides us by the Springs of his Providence; and we have no share in the Events.

XXVII. VVe should not ask why God would create the VVorld, that were to seek after a Cause of that which is the Cause of all things.

XXVIII. VVhen it is said, Seek those things that are above; the meaning is, those things that are great and sublime by their excellency.

XXIX. Man may make use of all things, but he ought only to enjoy God; and the use which he makes of all things, ought to have a Relation to God. Whosoever uses the Creatures otherwise, abuses them.

XXX. This Question is not St. Augustin's; it is a definition of Vertue out of Tully.

XXXI. Whosoever conceiveth a thing, conceives it as it is; and he who conceives it not as it is, doth not conceive it at all: There are no different degrees of Conception.

XXXII. We are afraid of losing what we love: and we are afraid that we shall not ob∣tain what we desire: If we desire to be without fear, How can we fear that we shall not be freed from fear?

XXXIII. Men should not desire precisely to be free from fear, because rash and stupid Men are without fear: we should have a reason why we are not afraid.

XXXIV. VVe ought to love what we possess, No man can know and love Happiness, with∣out being happy: Happiness therefore is an eternal love and knowledge of a good thing which cannot be taken away from us.

XXXV. To preserve and increase Charity, we must oppose and lessen Lust. This is to be begun by impressing a Dread of God's Judgments, to destroy the habit of Sin: After that, we ought to discover both the Beauty and Excellency of Vertue, to manifest the difference betwixt the Old and the New Man; to propose Christ's Life as an Example; to make use of his Exhor∣tations, Instructions, and Promises; to consider the vast number of those that followed and imitated him; to set forth the Vertues both of Saints and of Martyrs, as Patterns; and at last, to oppose Pride and Ambition, and to inspire the fear and the love of God.

I omit the following Questions, because they are obscure, and contain nothing remarkable.

The XLVth. Is against Judicial Astrology.

The XLVth. Is concerning Plato's Idea's.

The XLVIIIth. Is expressed in these terms. We believe Three sorts of Things. The First, Are such Things as are believed, and not conceived, as History. The Second, Are both believed and conceived at the same time; as the reasonings of Men. The Third, Are Things believed but not conceived at that time, though they are conceived afterwards; Such are Divine Instructions, which are conceived by none but those that have Pure Hearts.

In the LI. Question, He explains in what sence it is said, That Man was created after God's Image and Similitude: And in the LII. he prove•• That what is said in Genesis, That it repented God to have made Man, is not to be understood literally.

In the LIII. He justifies the Command which God gave the Jews to borrow of the Egyptians rich Vessels to carry them away; ••y saying, That God made use of them to Punish the Egyp∣tians: But that from thence it cannot be inferred, That Men may deceive, because the People of Israel was not capable of Evangelical Perfection.

The Resolutions of the following Questions, are Mystical and Moral Explications of several Passages both of the Old and of the New Testament.

The LXXX. Is against the Error of the Apollinarists.

The two Books of Questions directed to Simplicianus Bishop of Milan, who succeeded St. Am∣brose in the Year 397. are the first which St. Augustin writ, after he was made a Bishop. In the first, he discourseth upon two Passages of the Epistle to the Romans, upon what is said, Ch. 7. of the man, who being under the Law, doth not what the Law requireth: And upon what is written in the 9th. Chapter, of Jacob's being call'd, and Esau's being rejected. He proves in this First Book with great strength, the Necessity of Grace to every Good Work, even for the beginning of Faith, and a Free Call. He saith himself, both in his Book of Predestination, and in that of the Gift of Perseverance, That he began then to see clearly into those Matters which he had not taken right in his former Books. Yet he understands the first Passage in the Romans, of a man under the Law, who is yet without Grace; whereas he believed afterwards, that it was ra∣ther to be understood of that man, who being Spiritual in his Superior part, finds himself carnal, by the desires and motions of the Inferior.

The Second Book contains the Resolution of Five Questions, about particular Passages in the Old Testament. The First is, of what Spirit that which is said in the First Book of Kings, That the Spirit of God entred into Saul, is to be understood. Whether it was the Holy Ghost, or the Evil Spirit, wherewith he was possessed afterwards? After several Reflections and Digressions, St. Augustin concludes, That it must be understood of the Spirit of God; and that Saul was filled at first with the Spirit of God for a time, and afterwards was possessed with an evil Spirit. Yea, he thinks, That Saul had a Spirit of Prophecy at the time when he persecuted David, and he proves, That this Gift of the Holy Ghost may be found in Wicked Men.

The Second Question is upon those words attributed to God in the First Book of Kings, Ch. 15. It repenteth me that I have set up Saul. How God's Repenting can agree with his Prescience? St. Augustin answers, That the Repentance ascribed to God, is not accompanied with regret, as that of Men is; it is only an Alteration of Will. This Question puts him upon discoursing of God's Knowledge.

The Third Question is about the Story of the Witch of Endor. St. Augustin does not decide whether it was the Soul of Samuel, or a Phantome that appeared to Saul; he thinks the latter to be more probable.

Both the other Questions are about two Passages in the Books of Kings, which have not much difficulty.

The last is concerning the Spirit of Error, whereby God permitted King Ahab to be deceived.

Dulcitius, a Tribune in Africa, having proposed Eight Questions to St. Augustin, about some Matters which he had already treated of, he Collected in this Book, which he sent in Answer to his Questions, what he had said in his other Works.

The First Question was, Whether the Baptized that die in Sin, shall at any time be delivered from Damnation? St. Augustin answereth, No; and expounds a Passage of St. Paul, 1 Cor. Ch. 3. v. 11. where he speaks of the Fire which is to Purifie the Faithful, by consuming the Evil which they shall have built upon the sound Foundation of Faith. He understandeth by Fire, that Affliction in this Life which Purifies the Faithful from light Sins. He adds, That we may believe, that some such thing is done also in the other Life, towards those who die be∣fore they are cleansed from those light Sins: But he affirms, That none can believe without Im∣piety, that this can be apply'd to such as die with the guilt of those Sins that exclude Men from the Kingdom of God. This Answer is taken out of his Book of Faith.

The Second Question of Works, hath great relation to the former. It was demanded, Whe∣ther the Oblations and Prayers that are made for the Dead avail them any thing? St. Augustin Answers what he had said already in his Book concerning the Care that ought to be taken of the Dead, That the Oblations and Prayers are profitable to those who deserved in their Life-time, that Prayers should avail them. He addeth what he had said in his Enchiridion to Laurentius,

That in all that time, between Death and the last Resurrection, the Souls shall be detained in secret and hidden places, where they shall either enjoy Rest, or suffer Pain, according as they have deserved, when they were in the World: That Souls in that Condition, are refreshed by the Piety of the Living: when the Sacrifice of the Mediator is offered for them, or Alms

are given in the Church in their behalf. But, saith he, That availeth only them, who in their Life-time deserved by their Actions, that these things should be available to them, when they are out of the World...... Thus when the Sacrifices of the Altar are offered, or Alms given for all the Dead that were baptized, they become Thanksgivings for them that were extremely Good; They are Intercessions for those that were not great Sinners: And if these things do not ease those that were very wicked, yet they Administer Comfort to the Living.

The Third Question is, Whether all Men shall Die before the Day of Judgment? St. Augustin answereth, no; according to what he had said before in the 193d. Letter to Mercator; He con∣fesses, That this is a difficult Question.

The other Five Questions are upon some hard Passages of Scripture; He repeats those Expli∣cations which he had given in his other Books. This Book was Composed after the Enchiridion that was written in 421. and before the Book of Retractations written in 427. Which shews, That it must necessarily belong to the Years between; yet the Date of Easter of the Year wherein this Book was written, which is at the beginning, should regularly fall in the Year 430, or 419. wherefore there must have been a Mistake in the Cypher.

The small Treatise concerning the belief of those things which are not conceived, is placed again in this Volume, among the Treatises that are really St. Augustin's; though the Louvain Doctors after Erasmus, had put it among the Spurious Books. St. Augustin does not mention it in his Retractations; but he doth in the 231st. Letter to Count Darius; and it is written in his Stile, and is very worthy of him. He shews there, That many things are believed, though they are not seen. He particularly urges the Example of Friendship, and good Wishes which are believed without being seen. Whence he concludes, That if that Faith is taken away, which makes us believe things that we see not, Society would be utterly overthrown. He confesseth, That to believe a thing, we ought to have some Marks that such thing is: But he affirms, That we believe not in Jesus Christ, without sufficient Proofs of his Authority; That the Church alone is a constant and visible Proof of the Truth of his Doctrine; since we see that accomplished which Christ and the Prophets▪ Foretold. That none can doubt of the Truth of the Prophetical Books, since the Jews, who were the Christians great Enemies, preserved them; who also are unquestiona∣ble Witnesses of their Antiquity. He concludes this Discourse with a short Exhortation to the New Christians, to keep the Faith of the Church inviolable. What is said in the 10th. Chapter concerning the demolishing of the Temples, shews, That this Treatise was Written, and Compo∣sed after Honorius his Law, that was dated in 399.

It has been observed already, That St. Augustin being yet but a Priest, expounded the Creed in a Council of African Bishops assembled at Hippo. This Discourse which he afterwards put in Writing, as he declares in his Retractations, contains an exact Exposition of the Articles of the Creed. We have it here entituled, Of Faith and the Creed.

In the Book of Faith and Good Works, St. Augustin refutes several Errors which he had read in some Books that had been sent to him. There it was affirmed, 1. That all were to be admitted to Baptism who desired to be baptized, without any Examination. 2. That it was sufficient to instruct them in the Articles of Faith, though they were not taught the Rules of Manners till after they had received the Sacrament. 3. That what Crime soever a baptized Christian might commit, and in what Condition soever he might die, yet he should be infallibly saved, after he had passed through the Fire. St. Augustin declares against the first Proposition, That though the Wicked are to be tolerated in the Church, yet Correction was not to be neg∣lected, nor the Discipline of the Church suffered to relax. He confesses however, That Sinners ought to be reproved with Meekness and Charity. Against the Second Proposition, he teacheth, That Sinners who persevered in their Wickedness, were by no means to be admitted to Bap∣tism: Showing, That the Holy Scripture requireth Repentance before Baptism; That St. John gave Precepts concerning Manners to those which he baptized; and that this is the Temper of the Church, which appointed the Times and Ceremonies observed by the Catechumens, for no other end, but▪ to be sure, that they are well-disposed to receive the Sacrament of Baptism. Lastly of all, St. Augustin proves against the Third Error; That whosoever dieth in the State of Mortal Sin, without Repentance, is eternally Damned: And he Answers the place of St. Paul, that was alledged to prove the contrary. This Treatise was Composed in 413. after the Book of the Spirit and the Letter. Garnerius supposeth, That St. Jerom is the Person whom St. Augustin disputes with in this Book. But he cannot suspect that Father as guilty of either the first or the second Error: And it is altogether unlikely that it should be St. Jerom whom St. Augustin refuteth concerning the third.

The Enchiridion, or Treatise of Faith, Hope, and Charity, was written at the Request of Laurentius, a great Lord of Rome, and Brother to Dulcitius; who had desired St. Augustin, to send him a small Book, containing a•• Abridgment of the Christian Religion. To satisfie him, St. Augustin dedicated to him this Book; wherein he reduceth all Religion to the Vertues of Faith, Hope, and Charity, because a Man knoweth all that is comprised in Religion, when he knows what is to be Believed, what is to be Hoped for, and what is to be Loved. He explains what is to be Believed, by keeping to the Method of the Creed, refuting the Errours, and He∣resies that are contrary to the Doctrine of the Church, without naming their Authors. He layeth down also most excellent Maxims, such as these: That Faith does not stop at a curious Inquiry after Natural Things; That Errours of Right are more dangerous than Errours of

Fact; That a•••• 〈…〉〈…〉 some Things, which it signifies little w••••••her they are 〈◊〉〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉〈◊〉 H•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 upon Original Sin; upon the Fall of M•••••• and Angels; upon the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Baptism, and Grace; upon the Distinction of Ve••ial and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 S••••s; upon the Eternity, and the Inequ••lity of the Pains of the Da••••ed, upon the Ex•…•… of the VVill of God to save Men; upon F••••e-Will; and upon the State of Souls till the Day of Judgment. Having thus explained what concerns Faith, he comes to Hope; and he ••••••th, That Christians ••••••ght to Hope in God alone; and that whatso∣ever we Hope for, is co••prehended in the Lord's Prayer, upon which he makes some Reflecti∣ons. Lastly, he treateth of Charity; without which he pretends, That no Man can be Rig•…•…eous. To which he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 all the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of God, and Advices of the Go∣spel. This Book was written after St. Jerom's Death, who dyed in 420. as is plain by the 87th Chapter, where St. Augustin speaks of him as one dead.

The Book, inti••••led, The C••••b•••• of a Christian, has much the same Design with the forego∣ing▪ St. Augustin co••posed i•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 after he was a Bishop, in a plain Stile, that it might be the more proper to instill the Doctrine, and Pr••••••pts of Christian Religion into those Christi∣ans who were not Skilfull in the Latin Tongue. He exhorts them, at first, to fight against the Devil: Then he shews, Th•••• Men get the Victory over him, when they overcome their Passions, and bring their Bodies under Subjection; which is only done by submitting to God, to whom every Creature ought to be subject, either Willingly, or out of Necessity. He adds, That in this Combat, Man is armed with Faith, and with the Assistances which Christ me••••••ed for us by his Death. At last, he runs through the Articles of the Creed, and refutes the contrary Her••s••••s.

The Book of Instruction for these that have no Knowledge of our Religion, was written at the Request of a Deacon of Carthage, who desired of St. Augustin, Rules, and a Method to Ca∣••e••••i••e his People acceptably, and usefully. The Father comforts him at the beginning, upon his being, very often, not pleased with his own Discourses, since it sometimes happens, that a Discourse which displeases the Speaker, is very acceptable to the Hearers. He adviseth him to teach them cheerfully, and not to be tired with it; and then furnishes him with Rules how to instruct them right in their Religion. He saith, in the first place, That perfect Instruction should begin at the Creation of, the World, and end with the present Age of the Church: B•••• for this, there is no need of learning by heart, or reciting all the Books of the Bible; one needs only chuse the best, the most admirable, and most diverting Passages. He layeth down, in the second place, his usual Rule, That every thing ought to be referred to Charity▪ That Care must be taken, that the A••ditor may believe what is spoken; Hope what he Believes, and Love what he Hopes for. And he would have him inspired with a wholsome Fear of God's Judgments, and kept from all prospects of temporal Interest, and Advantage that he might have by being a Christian. He observes, That the same Method is not to be followed with the Learned, as with the Ignorant; and he lays down very prudent Rules how they are to be dealt withal. He shews what Things commonly ti•••• the Heare••••; and he gives excellent Remedies how they may be avoided; and at last, makes Two instructive Speeches, one pretty long, the other shorter, but composed with a great deal of Art, to serve for an Example, or Pattern of such Instructions, as ought to be given. This Treatise shews, That to instruct Men well in Religion, is an harder Task than most Men imagine; and that the Method, formerly used, was nobler, and larger, than that which is now observed. This Book is of the Year 400, or thereabouts.

Though St. Augustin does not mention his Treatise of Continency in the Review of his Works, yet he owns it in the 262d. Epistle; and Possidius reckons it among his VVorks. This Book is a Discourse upon these VVords of the 140th. Psalm. Set a Watch, O Lord, before my Mouth, and keep the Doors of my Lips. O let not my Heart be enclined to any evil Thing; let me not be occupied in ungodly Works, with the Men that work Wickedness. He shews, That true Continency consists in suppressing ones Passions; and he recommends the Necessity of Grace to overcome them. He speaks against the Proud who excuse their Sins, and particularly against the Manichees, who charged their Sins upon an evil Nature that was in them. This Sermon is thought to be of the Year 395. or thereabouts.

Both the following Treatises are written against the Errour of Jovinian. This Enemy of Virginity had drawn aside several Roman▪ Virgins from their Design of continuing so, and perswaded them to marry; saying to them, Are you better than Susanna, or Anna, or so many other Holy Women? Though Jovinian's Opinion was rejected at Rome, yet this Heretick's Disci∣ples gave out, That none could refute him without condemning Marriage. To undeceive those that were of this Opinion, St. Augustin writ a Book, intituled, Of the Advantage of Matrimony, before he undertook to speak of the Excellency of Virginity. Wherein he saith first, That the Union betwixt the Husband and the Wife, is the most Ancient, and the most Natural. After that, he examineth a Question, rather Curious, than Useful, namely, How Men could have had Children, had they persisted in the State of Innocence. He observes a Four-fold Ad∣vantage in Marriage: The Society of both Sexes, the Procreation of Children, the good Use of Lust, which is regulated by a Prospect of having Children, and the Fidelity which Hus∣band and Wife preserve towards each other. He saith, That every Union between a Woman and a Man, is not Marriage. He doth not think, That this Name is to be given to that Union,

whose aim was only to satisfie their brutish Passion, if they endeavoured to prevent their ha∣ving Children. He declares, That Man guilty of Adultery, who should abuse a Virgin, when he has a Design of Marrying another: As for the Young Woman, he judgeth her guilty of Sin, but not of Adultery, if she is true to that Man, and Designs not to marry when he leaveth her: Nay, he preferrs her before several married VVomen, who abuse Matrimony by their Intem∣perance. He doth not excuse from venial Sin, either the Man, or the VVoman, who have ano∣ther Prospect in Marriage, than the begetting of Children. In a word, he distinguishes Three Things in Marriage: The Fidelity which married Persons owe one to the other, which is of natural Right; the Procreation of Children, which ought to be the end of Marriage; and the Sacrament, ••r mysterious Signification, which makes it indissoluble: For which Reason he determines, That though humane Laws permit a Man to marry again, when he is divorced from a former Wife, yet it is not Lawful for Christians, to whom St. Paul forbids it. He con∣cludes, That Marriage is of it self a good Thing, but one of those good Things which we should not look after, but in order to a greater Good, or to avoid a great Evil. That before Christ, the most Continent might marry to multiply that People from whom the Messiah, was to be born; but now, as many as are able to contain, do well not to marry. That for this Reason, Men were permitted formerly to have several Wives, and never Women to have several Husbands, but now no Man is to have more than one Wife. That the Gospel-Pu∣rity is so great in this Point, That a Deacon was not to be ordained, who had ever had more than one Wife. He approves their Opinion, who understand this Maxim in its whole Extent, and without Restriction, as St. Jerom doth by excepting those who contracted a former Mar∣riage before Baptism: For, saith he, Baptism doth indeed remit Sins; but here the Question is not concerning a Sin. And as a young Woman that hath been defiled when she was a Catechu∣men, cannot be consecrated as a Virgin after Baptism, even so it hath been thought reasonable, that the Man who hath had more than one Wife, whether before, or after Baptism, should be looked upon as wanting one necessary Qualification for Orders.

In answer to Jovinian's Objection, he distinguishes the Habit from the Action of Vertue: This being Premised, he saith, That the old Patriarchs had an Habit of Continency, but did not practise it, because it was not convenient to do it in their time; and so, when the Question is put to a Man that is not married, Are you more perfect than Abraham? he ought to answer, No; but Virginity is more perfect than conjugal Chastity: Now Abraham was endu'd with both these Vertues; for he had the Habit of Continency, and exercised conjugal Chastity. He adds, That Persons are to be distinguished from Vertues: One Person may have one Vertue in a higher Degree than another, and yet be less Holy, because he hath not other Vertues in the same Degree. Thus a disobedient Virgin is less to be esteemed than a married Woman, with the Vertue of Obedience. Last of all, he exhorts Virgins not to be lifted up, because of the Excellency of their Condition, but to be constant in Humility.

The Book Of Holy Virginity, came out presently after that Of the Advantage of Matrimony. St. Augustin shews there, That Virginity is one of the most excellent Gifts of God, and that Humility is necessary to preserve it. He exalteth the Excellency of Virgins consecrated to God, by the Example of the Virginity of the Mother of God, who, according to him, had made a Vow of Continency before the Angel appeared to her. He refutes those that condemn Matri∣mony, and those that compare it with Celibacy. He does not think that Virginity is of Com∣mand, but of Advice: It should not be chosen as a thing necessary to Salvation, but as a state of greater Perfection. And this he proves by several Passages of Scripture, and explains a Passage of St. Paul, from which some concluded, that he recommended Virginity merely upon account of the Advantage of this present Life. He asserts also, That Virgins shall have a particular Reward in Heaven. At last, he exhorts them to Humility; proposing several convincing Reasons, and powerful Motives, to inspire them with it. Then he recommends to them, above all things, the Love of their Divine Spouse, and speaks of him in a very moving man∣ner:

Behold (saith he to them) the Beauty of your Spouse! Think that he is Equal with his Father, and yet he was willing to submit himself to his Mother: He is a King in Heaven, and a Slave upon Earth: He is the Creator of all things, and yet he ranked himself among the Creatures. Consider both the Greatness and the Beauty of that which the Proud look upon with Contempt: Behold with the Eyes of Faith the Wounds which he received upon the Cross, the Blood of the dying God, who is the Price of our Redemption, and the Cause of our Salvation... He seeketh only the inward Beauty of your Soul: He gave you the power to become his Daughters: He desires not the Handsomness of the Body, but Purity of Man∣ners. None can deceive him, nor make him be jealous of you; and you may love him with∣out fear of ever displeasing him upon account of false Suspicions.

Both this and the fore-going Books were written in the Year 401.

They did well to joyn unto this the Book that treats Of the Advantages of Widowhood, which Erasmus and others had inconsiderately rejected, as a Work that was none of St. Au∣gustin's. St. Augustin, indeed, takes no notice of it in his Retractations; but that's not to be wonder'd at, because it is only a Letter to Juliana, which Possidius put into his Catalogue. * 1.160 Philo and Bede quote it as St. Augustin's; and in the 15th. Chapter some other Pieces of St. Au∣gustin's

are quoted. This Book is an Instruction for Widows. He asserts there, That Widow-hood is to be preferr'd before Marriage: Yet he doth not condemn Second Marriages, nor Third and Fourth; but only says, That it is a great Crime to Marry after the Vow of Virginity; though he judges those Marriages to be good and valid, and blames those who look upon them as adulterous. The Practice of the Church at that time was, To put them under Penance who Married after vowing Virginity; but their Marriages were not yet declared void, as is plain by the Sixteenth Canon of the Council of Chalcedon, and by several other Testimonies of the Ancients. The rest of this Letter is full of Instructions to Juliana, and her Daughter De∣metrias, who had already made Profession of Virginity, as it is observed in the 19th. Chapter: And so this small Treatise is of the Year 414. He bids them beware of the Pelagian Errors.

In both the Books Of Marriages which cannot be excused from Adultery, St. Augustin handleth this nice and Difficult Question, Whether it be lawful either for the Man or the Woman to Marry after Divorce on the Account of Fornication? Pollentius, to whom these Books are directed, believed, That the Exception of the Case of Adultery, which we find in St. Mat∣thew's Gospel, was no less to be understood of a Permission to Marry again, than of a Separation of Bodies: so that a Husband might not only leave his adulterous Wife, but also take another when he was divorced from the first. St. Augustin affirms on the contrary, That a Woman thus divorced, ought never to Marry again, no more than the Husband who caused her to be divorced. This whole Dispute depends upon the Sence of that Passage in St. Matthew, which excepteth the cause of Fornication; and upon that of St. Paul, 1 Cor. 7. which saith, That the Bond of Matrimony is indissoluble but by the Husband's Death; and that if the Wife is mar∣ried to another while he liveth, she committeth Adultery. St. Augustin enlarges much upon the Sence of these two Passages. He endeavours to make the first to agree with his Opinion, which he groundeth especially upon the second. He answereth Pollentius's Arguments, and uses several Reasonings, upon the Matter. He confesses in his Retractations, That he had not yet cleared that Point, but that there are some considerable Difficulties besides, though he had given Light enough to resolve them.

He further explaineth in the 1st. Book, another Passage in the same Epistle of St. Paul, concerning the Dissolution of Marriage between Infidels. Pollentius held, That St. Paul abso∣lutely forbids Believing Husbands to put away their Unbelieving Wives: Whereas St. Augustin affirms, That it is only an Advice that he gives them, Not to use the liberty they have to Se∣parate. He concludes this Book with another Question concerning the Catechumens, who fall into such Diseases as take away their Speech and Knowledge, VVhether they should be Baptized or no? He saith, That they ought to be Baptized; though he doth not condemn those that dare not hazard the Sacrament: And he goes so far, as to declare, That in such Cases those very Catechumens may be Baptized, who are known to be in a habit of Sin, and who ought not to be admitted to Baptism at another time. He adds, That Penitents are to be dealt withal after the same manner, and they should not be suffered to Die before they are Reconciled. In the 2d. Book, he treateth more at large than in the First, Of the Indissolubility of Ma••riages, and examines several Questions upon that Subject. He concludes with an Exhor∣tation to Husbands that have left their VVives, to live in Continency; alledging the Example of Church-men, who abstain so religiously, though they often were forced to take that Pro∣fession upon them against their VVills. The rank which St. Augustin sets these two Books in, in his Retractations, shews that he composed them in the Year 419.

The two next Books are concerning Lying. There St. Augustin handleth this Question, which was very famous in his time, Whether a Lye may be used upon some Occasions? He confesseth in the 1st. Book, entituled, Of Lying, and written in 395. That this is a perplexing Question, often disturbing Consciences; and that there seem to be some Occasions, when in Civility; and some∣times, out of Charity, officious Lyes may be lawful. He says that he will forthwith examine the Question, that he may find out some Light in so obscure a Matter; and that at last he will declare for the Truth; being persuaded, That though he were mistaken in so doing, yet his Mistake would prove less dangerous; because Error can never do less mischief, than when Men are deceived by a great Love of the Truth, and by opposing Falshood with too much Zeal.

After this Preface, he defines what Lying is. He confesses, That Ironies are not Lyes; That every Untruth which a Man may speak, is not a Lye, if Men believe that what they say is True: and, That to Lye, is to speak what we do not think, with a design to deceive. VVhereupon he examines this subtle Question, VVhether a Man speaking what he knoweth to be false, because he is sure that he to whom he speaks will not believe it, tells a Lye? And on the other side, VVhether a Man that speaketh a Truth, with a design to deceive him whom he speaks to, because he knows that he will not believe him, is free from Lying? St. Augustin saith, That neither of these can be taxed with Lying; because the one design'd to persuade the Truth, by telling an Untruth; and the other spake the Truth, to persuade a Falsity: but nei∣ther can be excused from Imprudence and Rashness. Then he comes to the Question which he proposed to himself, VVhether a Man might Lye upon some Occasions? Those that held the Affirmative, alledged several Examples of Lyes, which seem to be both approved and commen∣ded in the Old Testament, and added a Reason from Common Sence. Should any one (said they) flee to your House for shelter, and it is in your power to save him from Death, by telling a Lye,

would you see him unjustly murthered, rather than tell a Lye? If a sick Man asketh you a Question about something that he must not know; yea, supposing that he will be the worse if you give him no Answer; would you then utter a Truth that might occasion Death? or will you keep silence, when you may ease him by telling a charitable Lye? St. Augustin Op∣poses to these Reasons those Passages of Holy Scripture which forbid Lying without restriction, and then answereth the Examples out of the Old Testament; That the Righteous who seem to have Lyed, did not intend that what they said should be understood in the usual sence, but that by a Prophetical Spirit they meant to discover those things that were signified by those Figures; as for other Persons which are not in the number of the Righteous, the Holy Scripture never approves their Actions, but by comparing it with a greater Evil. He affirms, That there is no Example of Lying in the New Testament, and endeavours to answer the Inferences which they pretend to draw from the Instances of the Dispute betwixt St. Peter and St. Bar∣nabas, and betwixt St. Peter and St. Paul, as well as from the Circumcising of Timothy. Lastly, That he might put an End to all the Reasons alledged from Necessity or Advantage, he main∣tains, That we must never do Evil, what Advantage soever we may get by it: That so the whole Question is, Whether Lying be Evil or no? And not, Whether it is sometimes Profi∣table? VVhence he concludes, That no Lye is to be told, either to preserve our Chastity or our Life, or for the Good of others, or for any other reason whatsoever; no, not for the Eter∣nal Salvation of our Neighbour, because that Sin cannot be imputed to a Man, which he can∣not prevent but by committing himself another Sin. To explain what he had said more at large, he reckons up Eight sorts of Lyes; and having laid this down for a Rule, That we must depend altogether upon Gospel-Precepts, he enlargeth upon those that make against Lying.

The Second Book against Lying, is written upon the same Principles, but long after the First; for St. Augustin wrote it in 420, at the Request of Consentius, who asked him, Whether it was not lawful to make use of Lyes, to discover the Priscillianists, who concealed their Error by Lying, and horrid Execrations? St. Augustin condemns not only the Practice of the Priscillia∣nists, but also the Zeal of the Catholicks, who made use of Lyes to discover the Men of that Sect. He positively condemns the Catholicks Action, who feigned themselves Priscillianists, more than that of the Priscillianists, who feigned themselves Catholicks. From hence he takes an opportunity to enter upon the general Question concerning Lying; and he affirms, That it is never allow'd upon any Pretence whatsoever; because whatsoever is Sin in its own Nature, can never be rectified by any good Intention. He shews, by the Examples of David, and Lot, that we are not always to imitate the Actions of Righteous Men. He excuseth Abraham, and Isaac from Lying. As for Jacob's Action, he saith, it was no Lye, but a Mystery: That there is no Example of any Lye in the New Testament, because Tropes, Parables, and Figures, cannot be called Lyes, no more than what is said of Jesus Christ; that in his Dis∣course with the Pilgrims, who went to Emmaus, he made as though he would have gone further; that we are no more to imitate Thamar's Lye, than Juda's Fornication; that God rewarded not the Lye of the Egyptian Midwives, but their Compassion towards the Israelites Children. The same must be said of Rahab's Action. In one word; These Examples of Lyes taken out of the Old Testament, are no Lyes, or if they be, they cannot be excused. Lastly, Whatsoever Pretence they may have, Men are never permitted to betray the Truth for any Advantage, how great soever it may be, because they are never allowed to sin. And indeed, as St. Augustin observes once again, It is a very dangerous thing to allow Lying upon some occa∣sions, because this Maxim may be stretched too far, and upon the same Principles, Perjury, and Blasphemy may in time be allowed.

St. Augustin confesses, in his Retractations, that both these Treatises are very intricate; and that he had a Design himself to suppress them.

The Book Of the Business of Monks, is an excellent Satyr against some Monks, who thought themselves exempted from working with their Hands, because Christ hath said, That we should take no care for the Morrow, and so contented themselves with Praying, Reading, and Sing∣ing. St. Augustin opposes to them both the Example, and the Authority of St. Paul, who plainly says, That whosoever will not Work, ought not to Eat. He refutes the false Distincti∣ons which they made to shift it of. He proves, That the true Sence of that Passage of the Gospel which they quoted, did not exempt Men from Working, but only banished the Ingra∣titude of worldly Men; that to labour with ones Hands is not inconsistent with Prayer; that it is so far from being unworthy of the Monastical State, that it is part of it: For, saith he, if a Rich Man makes himself a Monk, what can there be more perfect, than having quitted great Estates, to be obliged to Labour to get Necessaries. And if this new Convert be Poor, and of mean Condition, would not that be a criminal Nicety, to desire to live more at Ease in a Monastery, than he did before in the World? Afterwards he draws the Picture of those idle Monks, whom he calls Hypocrites in Monastical Habits, with whom the Devil hath over-spread the World. They travel (saith he) from Province to Province, without any Mission; they have no fix'd Habitation, and abide in no place; they continually alter their Station: Some carry Relicks about, (if they be Relicks,) and make an Advantage of them: Others take much upon them, by reason of their Habit and Profession: Some say they are going to see their Kindred, who, as they have heard, dwell in such a Countrey: But they all beg, and take it ill if you give them not, either

to supply the Wants of such a Poverty as enricheth them, or to Recompence a seeming and counterfeit Honesty. EXIGUNT AUT SUMPTUS LUCROSAE EGESTATIS AUT SIMULATAE PRETIUM SANCTITATIS. Lastly, St. Augustin compares his own Condition with that of the Monks; affirming, That he would chuse the Life of a Regular Monastery, to work at certain hours with his Hands, and to have others for Prayer and pious Reading, rather than to be subject to the Fatigues of Office, and to be continually entangled with the secular Busi∣nesses of other Men. Towards the latter end, he laughs at the fancy of those Monks who would never cut their Hair. Nothing is more pleasant than the Answer which they made to that Passage of the Apostle, where he forbids Men to let their Hair grow. This (said they) is spoken for Ordinary Men, but not for those that have made themselves Eunuchs for the King∣dom of Heaven. St. Augustin makes Sport with that ridiculous Notion of the Monks; shewing them, That they are Men as well as others. This Book is in the Retractations, among those that were written about the Year 400.

The next Book is concerning the Predictions of Daemons; wherein St. Augustin explains how they may Imagine and Foretell things, and how they often Mistake: shewing at the same time, That Religion permits us not to Consult with them. He supposes that Daemons have very subtile Bodies. This small Treatise was composed in an Easter-Week, of some of the Years be∣twixt 406, and 411.

The Book of the Care which they ought to have of the Dead, was written to answer that Que∣stion which St. Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, had proposed to St. Augustin in the Year 421. name∣ly, Whether a dead Man was any thing the better for being buried in the Church of some holy Martyr. To this Question is added another, To what purpose are the Church's Prayers for the Dead, seeing that according to the Apostle's Maxim, All Men shall be judged according to what they have done in this Life? St. Augustin answereth, That the Book of Maccabees establishes the Custom of Praying for the Dead; and, That though nothing of it were found in the Old Testa∣ment, yet the Custom of the Church is sufficient to authorize that Practice, which is done in the Administration of the Eucharist. He is persuaded, That the Honour of Burial doth neither Good nor Hurt to the Soul of the dead Person; but yet that this Duty is to be pay'd to the Dead, as a Testimony of the Respect which is due to the Memory of pious Persons: That to be buried in a Martyrs Church, doth nothing of it self; but it serves to put the Faithful in mind of Praying for the Dead, because the Devotion for the Martyr encreaseth the Fervency of Prayer. But that commonly the Care of decent Burial proceeds from the Respect which Men have for the Body: That Martyrs had Reason to lay aside that Care: That the Scripture commends those that are careful to bury the Dead, because it is a Token o•• their Tenderness and Affection towards their Brethren. St. Augustin speaks afterwards concerning Apparitions of the Dead, by Dreams or otherwise; and having mention'd several Examples, he examineth how they come to pass. He thinks it more rational, to attribute them to the working of Angels, who form those Idea's in the Imagination, than to the Souls of the Dead. He does not believe that they are pre∣sent, or that they take any notice at that time of the things that are done, but that they are acquainted with them afterwards, either by Angels, or by the Souls of those that are dead; or last of all, by the Inspiration of God. And by this last means, he believes that the Martyrs come to know the Necessities of the Faithful, and to hear their Prayers. He does not question but Martyrs help the Living; but he knows not whether they do it by themselves, or whether God doth it by Angels, at their Request. He confesseth, That we cannot know by which of these means, or whether by both, the Martyrs work Miracles.

He concludes, That of all that is done for the Dead, nothing availeth them where they are but the Offering of the Eucharist, Prayers and Almsdeeds: That these things are not useful to all, but only to such as deserved in their life-time, to reap Benefit by them after their death: That however, these things are performed for all Christians that were Baptized, because we cannot distinguish who shall be the better for it or not: That it is better that they should be superfluous to some, than that they should be wanting to others: That these Duties are with Reason more exactly performed for our Friends and Kindred, that we may receive the same Assistance from our other Relations: That the Decency of Burial availeth nothing to the Salvation of the Dead, but it is a Duty of Humanity which is not to be neglected.

The Discourse of Patience, is one of those that St. Augustin mentions in the 231st. Letter. He treateth there of that Vertue rather Dogmatically than Pathetically. He takes notice at first, That God's Patience is of another nature from that of Men, because he cannot suffer. Then he distinguishes True Patience, which is a Vertue, from the Counterfeit, which is a Vice. Ambitious Men, Covetous, Luxurious Men, and Robbers, endure patiently extremity of Pain and Misery; yet want the Vertue of Patience, because they suffer upon an ill account. None but such as Suffer for a good Cause, can be said to be truly Patient. But if wicked Men endure all things for the Goods of this World, What ought not the Righteous to suffer for Eternal Life? Then he proposes the Examples both of Job and of the Martyrs; to the which he opposes the Im∣patience of the Donatists, who killed themselves, that they might be accounted Martyrs; shew∣ing, That Self-Murther is a greater Sin than Murthering of another;

For (saith he) a Parricide is more guilty than a Man-slayer, because he kills a Person that is nearer to him than other Men: By the same reason, he must be thought the greater Sinner who kills himself, be∣cause none are so near to us as our selves.

Lastly, He maintains, That True Patience is not

from our own strength, but from God's help; because true Patience is grounded upon Charity, which is the Gift of God. This puts St. Augustin upon discoursing of Grace, and proving that it is not given to our Merits; but that it prevents them, and goeth before Faith it self, which is the beginning of all good Works. This short Discourse was written about the Year 418.

Of the Four following Sermons upon the Creed, there is none but the first which comes near St. Augustin's Stile, as it is observed in the Preface. It contains a clear and succinct Explication of the Articles of the Creed. He saith, upon the Article of the Church, That there is but one only true Catholick Church, which opposes all Heresies, and can never be overcome. Upon the Ar∣ticle of the Forgiveness of Sins, he distinguisheth two sorts of Sins, Light and Great Sins; Bap∣tism remitteth both. After Baptism, Light Sins, from which no man can be absolutely free, are remitted by the Lord's Prayer: But great Sins, as Adultery, and other Enormous Crimes, cannot be remitted but by an humbling Penance. In this Creed we find the Article of Ever∣lasting Life, which gives Grounds of Suspicion, that this Discourse is none of St. Augustin's; because this Article is not in the Book of Faith, and the Creed, which is certainly his.

The Benedictines have Reason to Print the Three other Sermons upon the same Subject, in a small Character, and to observe as they do, that they are written in a very different Stile from St. Augustin's; yet they believe them to be ancient, and written by some Disciple of St. Augu∣stin, during the Vandals Persecution against the Catholicks, which is mentioned in the Second Sermon.

They likewise put into the same rank Three other Sermons, which they believe to belong to the same Author; The Sermon of the Fourth Day of the Week, Or, Of the Dressing of the Lord's Vineyard; A Discourse concerning the Flood, and the Sermon of the Time of the Barbarian's Perse∣cution; which they have also Printed in a small Character.

They have left the Sermon of the New Song under St. Augustin's Name; but they say in the Preface, That they doubted whether it was his. They might have passed the same Censure of the Sermon of Discipline, and that of the Usefulness of Fasting; which I cannot find to be any more than the others of S. Augustin's Stile: Nay, I scarce believe, That the Sermon of the taking of the City of Rome, which is the last in this Volume, is truly St. Augustin's; yet every man is left to judge as he pleases, that shall read it.

The Treatises which you find in the Supplement, are certainly none of St. Augustin's: The Benedictines have made an exact Critick of them in their Prefaces, and have Collected all that could be said or guess'd at concerning their Authors.

The first is a Collection of One and twenty Questions, gather'd without any Order by a very Ig∣norant Author. Most of them are about Philosophical Matters, and composed of Extracts out of several of St. Augustin's Books.

The Sixty five following Questions and Answers, which are found in some Manuscripts under Orosius's and St. Augustin's Names, are in a better order than the former, and concerning more Theological Matters; but they are Extracts out of several Passages: The first Twelve are taken out of a Treatise falsly attributed to St. Augustin, Concerning the Trinity and Unity of God. Most of them that follow, are Extracts out of St. Eucherius. Some are out of St. Augustin's Treatise upon Genesis. They end with a Citation of a Passage of St. Augustin against those who desire to be Bishops, that they might Command, taken out of the 19th. Chapter of the 19th. Book of the City of God; which is quoted as of a Father ancienter than himself: One of the Fathers, saith he, hath said very elegantly, against those that desire to Command: Let those, saith he, who would Com∣mand rather than Serve others, know, that they are not Bishops.

The Book of Faith to Peter, belongs to St. Fulgentius, to whom it is ascribed in a Manuscript of Corby, above One thousand Years old, as well as in another later. It is cited under his Name by Ratramnus, in his Treatise of the Body and Blood of Christ. Both Isidore, and Honorius of Autun, do likewise mention a Treatise of St. Fulgentius, containing the Rule of Faith; which is not different from this.

The Book of the Spirit and Soul, which is a Collection of Passages from several Authors, is attributed to Hugo de S. Victore by Trithemius, and by Vincentius Bellovacensis, and Printed among this Author's Works. Yet the great number of Extracts taken out of the very Works of Hugo de S. Victore makes it questionable, whether it be his. St. Thomas ascribes it to a Cistercian Monk. The Benedictines believe that it was written by Alcherus, a Friend of Isaac's, Abbot of Stella, to whom this Man directed a Letter of the Soul. In the Bibliotheca Cisterciana, it is attributed to Isaac, and it is observed that he publish'd it under Alcherus's Name; but it is not likely that Ab∣bot Isaac would insert a part of his own Letter into this Treatise.

The Treatise of Friendship is an Epitome, or rather an Extract out of the Treatise of Aelredus Rievallensis, which is found among that Author's Works.

The Book of the Substance of Love, is made up of two small Treatises among the Works of Hugo de S. Victore. That of the Love of God, is a Collection of Passages of this same Author's, out of St. Bernard, and St. Anselm Vincentius Bellovacensis cites it under Peter Comestor's Name.

The Soliloquies that are here, are not those of St. Augustin, which are in the first Volume of his Works: These are made up out of Passages of the Soliloquies and Confessions of St. Au∣gustin, and the Books of Hugo de S. Victore. There is the first Chapter of the Fourth Lateran Council held in the Year 1198.

It is proved in the Preface to the Book of Meditations, that they cannot be St. Augustin's. Many of them are attributed to St. Anselm; but the Benedictines have prov'd, That they are rather written by John Abbot of Fescamp, who lived in the time of the Emperor Henry III. to whose Widow he directs a Letter, published by Father Mabillon in the first Volume of his Analecta, from another Manuscript of the Abby of St. Arnoul of Metz, where this Treatise of Meditations is mentioned, part whereof is found in the same Manuscript.

The following Treatise of the Contrition of the Heart, is taken out of the Meditations attri∣buted to St. Anselm.

The Manual is Composed likewise of Extracts out of St. Anselm's Works, and St. Bernard's, Hugo's de S. Victore, and Alcuinus; there are also some Passages of St. Augustin, St. Cyprian, St. Gregory, and of Isidore of Seville. Part of this Book is in the next Book, entituled the Looking-Glass: Another part of it is the Extract of a Prayer which is in the Manuscript of Corby, which containeth the Works of Abbot John.

The Looking-Glass makes a part of the Confession of Faith, which Chiffletius published under Alcuinus's Name, yet it is Composed of Passages out of Alcuinus's own Works.

The next Book is entituled, The Looking-Glass of a Sinner. The Author citeth a Sentence of Odo Cluniacensis, in Commendation of St. Martin. He useth the term of Prebend, and he hath taken some places out of the Prayer of Hugo de S. Victore, out of the Book of the Spirit and Soul already mentioned, and out of the Book of Conscience, ascribed to St. Bernard. The Book of the threefold Habitation is of the same nature; and there are the same Notions. It is very likely that all these Treatises of Piety belong to the same Author.

The Book intituled, The Ladder of Paradise, attributed to St. Bernard, and intituled in his VVorks, the Ladder of the Cloister; or, a Treatise how to Pray; is written by Guigo [or Guido] Carthusianus, as appears by the Letter that serves for a Preface, taken out of the Manuscript of the Carthusian House in Colen.

Honorius of Autun, in his Book of Luminaries, mentions a Book which he had written, inti∣tuled, Of the Knowledge of Life; or, Of the true Life. This here bears the same Title, and has the Stile and Genius of this Author; as is proved in the Preface.

The Book of a Christian Life, was formerly restored by Holstenius, to one Fastidius, a Britain, who is the true Author of it; as we learn not only by the ancient Manuscript belonging to the Monastery of Mount-Cassin, by which Holstenius Printed it at Rome, in 1633. but also by the Authority of Gennadius, who ascribes it to him, and who observes that this Author was a Britain.

In this Book there are several Footsteps of Pelagius's Errors; he lived much about the same time.

The Book of Wholsome Instructions, is here restored upon the Credit of an ancient Manu∣script, in the Library of M. Colbert, to Paulinus Patriarch of Aquileia; who lived about the latter end of the * 1.161 Ninth Century.

The Author of the Book, Of the Twelve Abuses of the Age, is not known; it is as wrongfully attributed to St. Augustin as to St. Cyprian: only it is observed in the Preface, That this Book is quoted by Jonas Bishop of Orleans, who was ancienter than Hincmar, who writ a Book bearing the same Title, different from that mentioned by Flodoardus: Pamelius found a Manuscript, having in the Margin the Name of Evrard, instead of St. Augustin; but this Evrard is not known.

They did not Print the two Treatises of the Seven deadly Sins, and of the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit, which F. Vignier published under St. Augustin's Name, in the First Part of his Sup∣plement, because they are amongst the VVorks of Hugo de S. Victore.

The Treatise of the Conflict betwixt Vertues and Vices was first ascribed to St. Augustin, then to St. Leo, then to St. Ambrose, and at last to Isidore of Seville: but here it is restored to its true Author Ambrosius Autpertus, a Benedictine Monk [of the Monastery of St. Vincent] upon the Vultarnus near Benevente. This Treatise is mention••d in his Life, which is in the Acts of the Benedictines, Age III. at the Year 778. The Stile of this Treatise is very like that of this Au∣thor's Commentary upon the Revelations.

Of the same Nature is the Book of Sobriety and Charity, and the Author of it is unknown. There Drunkenness is particularly reproved. This Book is well enough written, and seemeth to me to be ancient.

The Benedictines prove in their Preface to the Book of true and false Repentance, That this Book has not St. Augustin's Stile, though it hath been cited under his Name by Gratian, by the Master of the Sentences, Petrus Blesensis, and several others.

The Treatise of Antichrist, is likewise among the VVorks' of Alcuinus and Rabanus. Rupertus cites it without naming the Author. The Manuscripts attribute it to Alcuinus, and it agrees well enough with his other Writings. It contains several Circumstances relating to Anti-Christ, and the End of the World, which he describeth with as much Confidence as if he had learned it by Revelation.

After this Treatise comes a Prayer, or rather an Imprecation out of several Verses of the Psalms. It is intituled in a Manuscript of the King's Library, The Psalter of Pope John, made at Vienna. John the XXIId. is thought to be the Man meant by that Title.

The following Treatise upon the Magnificat, is a Fragment of the Treatise of Hugo de S. Victore, upon this Hymn.

That of the Virgin's Assumption, is a Sermon of some Author of the Twelfth Century, or thereabouts; which teacheth that the Blessed Virgin is in Heaven, both Soul and Body.

Both the Discourses concerning Visiting the Sick, contain useful Rules to teach Priests how they should behave themselves towards Sick Persons; but they are very late. Both the Discourses of the Comfort for the Dead, are of the same Nature, and it may be of the same Author.

The Treatise of Christian Behaviour is a Collection of Notions taken out of St. Eloi or Eli∣gius Bishop of Noyon, and Caesarius. The Discourse upon the Creed, is likewise a Collection of Remarks drawn out of Rufinus, Caesarius, St. Gregory, Ivo Carnutensis, and others. The Sermon upon Easter-Eve, about the Paschal-Lamb, and that upon the * 1.162 41st. Sermon, are among the Books falsly attributed to St. Jerom.

The three Sermons to the Novices, concerning Unction, Baptism, and washing of the Feet, are not like St. Augustin's Writings, though they are attributed to him in very ancient Ma∣nuscripts.

The Treatise of the Creation of the first Man, is inserted entire into the Book of the Spirit and the Soul. It is among St. Ambrose's VVorks, entituled a Treatise of the Dignity of the first Man; and among Alcuinus's it is intituled, Thoughts of the Blessed Albinus a Levite, upon these words of Genesis, Let us make Man after our own Image.

The Sermon of the Vanity of this present Age, is inserted into the Treatise of Christian Behaviour, The Author of the Sermon upon the contempt of the World is not known. That about the Advan∣tage of Discipline belongs to Valerianus Cemeliensis: It is not known who was the Author of the Sermons of Obedience, Humility, Prayer, Alms, and that of the Generality of Alms-deeds. The small Discourse of the Twelve Prayers spoken of in the 21st. Chapter of the Revelations, belongs perhaps to Amatus a Monk, of Mount-Cassin, or rather an Extract of Bede's Commentary upon that Passage in the Revelations.

Finally, The Sermons to the Brethren that live in the Wilderness, are the Work of some Modern Monk, who was so imprudent as to publish them under St. Augustin's Name, though it be as clear as the day, that they are not of this Father. Baronius observes, That they were Compos'd by an Impostor, and that they are full of Fables, Falsities, and Lyes. Bellarmin saith, That the Stile of them is Childish, Course, and Barbarous. There are several Passages out of St. Augustin, Caesarius and St. Gregory. It is probable, that the Author was a Flemming.

The SEVENTH TOME.

THE Seventh Volume contains St. Augustin's great Work of the City of God. He undertook * 1.163 it about the Year 413. after the taking of Rome by Alaric King of the Goths, to refute the Heathens who attributed that Misfortune to the Christian Religion. This VVork held him several Years, by reason of many intervening Businesses which he could not put off; so that he did not finish it before the Year 426. It is divided into Two and twenty Books, whereof the first Five refute those who believe that the worship of the Gods is necessary for the good of the VVorld; and affirmed, That all the Mischiefs lately happened, proceeded from no other cause, but the abolishing of that Religion. The next Five are against those who confessing that the same Calamities have been in all Ages; yet pretend that the worship of the Heathen Divinities was profitable to a future Life. Thus the Ten first Books are to Answer both those Chimerical Opinions, which are contrary to the Christian Religion. But lest they should reproach him with having refuted the Opinions of others, without establishing the Christian Religion, the other part of this VVork is allotted to that purpose, and it consists of Twelve Books, though he sometimes establisheth our belief in the former Ten, and so in the Twelve others he sometimes correcteth the Errors of our Adversaries. In the Four first of these Twelve, he describes, The Ori∣ginal of the two Cities; the one of God, and the other of the VVorld. In the Four next, their Progress; And in the Four last, their Ends: And so, though all the 22. Books do equally treat of both Cities, yet this VVork has its Name from the better, and they are commonly called, The Books of the City of God. This is the Account which St. Augustin gives, both of the Subject and of the Occasion of these Books in his Retractations. Let us now examine more particularly what is most remarkable in each Book; for it is a VVork made up of a great variety of very learned and very curious things.

In the First Book, he shews, That instead of imputing to the Christians, the Desolation and the taking of Rome, the Heathen ought rather to ascribe to the special favour of Jesus Christ, That the Barbarians, only out of reverence to his Name, spared all those that had retired into the Churches. He pretends, That there are no Examples in the VVars of the Heathen, to shew That the Enemies who spoiled a Town taken by Storm, spared those who took Sanctuary in the Temples of their Gods. This puts St. Augustin upon asking, why this Favour of God was ex∣tended to those Ungodly Men that fled into the Churches, who feigned themselves to be Chri∣stians; and why the good were involved in the same Mischief with the wicked. He confesses, That both the Good and the Evil Things of this VVorld are common both to Good and Evil

Men; but the difference consists in the Use which they make of them. He observes, That per∣haps good Men probably are punished with the wicked, because they took no care to reprove * 1.164 and to correct them; and that however, good Men lose nothing by losing the good things of this World; That a Christian ought to be easily conforted for want of Burial, seeing that this doth him neither good nor hurt: And he comforteth the Virgins that had been ravished in that disorder; shewing, That they lost neither the Chastity of the Soul, nor the Purity of the Body: He excuseth those that killed themselves, rather than endure that dishonour. But he shews at the same time, That this Action so much admired by the Heathen, is contrary both to Reason, and to the Laws of Nature; and that it is never lawful to kill our selves upon any account whatsoever. He answers the Examples of some holy Women who threw themselves into the River, to escape the Violence of those that would have ravish'd them. He saith, That they might have been induced to that, by the Spirit of God, as Sampson was. He concludes with a Description of the Depravation of the Romans, and the Disorders of their Manners, at that time.

In the Second Book he affirms, That the corruption of Manners, which is the greatest of Mischiefs, was always reigning in Rome; and that the Gods they Worshipped, were so far from prescribing them Laws, for the Reformation of their Manners, that on the contrary, they encouraged them to Vice, by their Examples, and by the Ceremonies that were used in their Worship.

In the Third Book he goes back as far as the Siege of Troy, and then takes a view of the prin∣cipal Events which happened to the People of Rome, to convince the most Stubborn, That their Gods preserved them not from the same Disasters and Calamities, which the Heathen now imputed to the Christian Religion.

In the Fourth Book he shews, That the encrease of the Roman Empire can be attributed neither to all the Divinities which they adored, nor to any one in particular: That however, no Empire is to be called Happy, which is encreased only by War, as the Roman Empire was: That great Empires, without Justice, were but great Robberies; and that the true God alone, is the sole Dispenser of the Kingdoms of the Earth.

He prosecuteth the same Subject in the Fifth Book; and proves, in the beginning, That the greatness of Empires depends not upon Chance, nor upon a particular Conjunction of the Stars: Which gives him occasion to speak of Destiny, and to refute judicial Astrology at large. He acknowledges a Destiny, if by this Term is meant a series, and concatenation of all Cau∣ses, which God foresaw from all Eternity; but he advises Men rather not to use that word which may have an ill Sence. He endeavours to make God's Fore-knowledge, and the infalli∣bility of those Events, which he foresees, to agree with Man's Free-Will. Then from this Disposition of Things, he comes to enquire into the Causes of the Roman Victories, and he meets with none more probable than their Honesty. He confesses, That God rewarded their moral Vertues with those sorts of Recompences; adding, That thereby God made the Inhabi∣tants of the eternal City, to know what Recompence they were to expect for their Christian Vertues. Since the counterfeit Vertues of the Heathen were so well rewarded, that he set this Example before their Eyes, to teach them how much they ought to be in love with their Heavenly Country for an immortal Life, since the Inhabitants of an Earthly Country were so much in love with it, for an humane, and a mortal Glory; and how hard they were to Labour for that Heavenly Country, since the Romans had taken such great Pains for their Earthly One.

He examineth afterwards, wherein consists the true Happiness of Christian Kings, and Princes: And he shews, That they are not Happy for having reigned long, for dying in Peace, and leaving their Children successors of their Crowns, nor for the Victories which they obtained, because such Advantages are common to them with ungodly Kings: But that Christian Princes are said to be Happy, when they set up Justice, when in the midst of the Praises that are given them, and the Honours that are pay'd unto them, they are not swell'd with Pride, when they submit their Power to the Sovereign Power of God, and use it to make his Worship to flourish. When they fear, love, and worship God; when they preferr, before this which they now enjoy, that wherein they are not afraid to meet with any Competitours; when they are slow to Punish, and ready to Forgive; when they punish only for the good of the Publick, and not to satisfie their Revenge; and when they forgive purely that Men may be Corrected, and not that Crimes may be Countenanced; when being obliged to use Severity, they temper it with some Actions of Meekness, or Clemency; when they are so much the more temperate in their Pleasures, by how much they have a greater Liberty to exceed; when they affect to Command their Passions, rather than all the Nati∣ons of the World, and they do all these Things, not out of Vain-Glory, but to obtain eter∣nal Happiness; and, in short, when they are careful to offer unto God, for their Sins, the Sacrifice of Humility, Mercy, and Prayer.

These, saith St. Augustin, are the Christian Prin∣ces whom we call Happy: Happy even in this World by Experience, and really Happy, when what we look for, shall come. Finally, he proposes the Examples of some Christian Empe∣rours, and particularly of Constantine, and Theodosius, whose Greatness, and Prosperities, he extols and sets forth.

In the Sixth Book, St. Augustin proves by the Authority of Varro, that, the fabulous Divi∣nity of the Heathen is ridiculous; he makes the same Conclusion concerning their civil Theolo∣gy, and grounds what he saith of it upon Seneca's Authority.

He goes on in the Seventh, to discover the Falshood of the Heathen civil Theology; shew∣ing, That their chiefest Divinities, or select Gods, do not deserve to be called Gods; and that the Christian's God alone governs the World.

The Eighth Book refutes the natural Theology of their Philosophers: He preferrs the Pla∣tonists before all other Philosophers, and owns that they knew the True God; shewing with∣all, that they were deceiv'd by honouring Daemons, as subaltern Deities, and Mediators betwixt God, and Men: He shews,

That the Christians never committed this Mistake; and that they are so far from adoring the Daemons, which are evil Spirits, that they do not worship the Angels, nor the Holy Martyrs; that they do indeed Honour, and Reverence them as the Servants of God, but that they did not build Temples for them, nor consecrate Priests, nor offer Sacrifices unto them. For, saith he, who among Christians ever saw a Priest before an Altar, consecrated to God, upon the Body of a Martyr, say in his Prayer, Peter, Paul, or Cyprian, I offer you this Sacrifice?

It is offered to God, though it be upon the Monuments of Martyrs; and these Ceremonies were appointed to be performed upon their Monuments, for no other end, but to give the True God Thanks for the Victories which they had obtained, and at the same time, to stir up Christians to imitate their Courage, and to make themselves wor∣thy to have a share in their Crowns, and Rewards: So that all the Acts of Piety, and Reli∣gion, which are done at the Tombs of the Holy Martyrs, are Honours pay'd to their Memory, and not Sacrifices offered to them as Divinities.

But forasmuch as they owned Two sorts of Daemons, some good, and some bad, St. Augustin examines that Distinction in the next Book, where he shews by the Principles both of Apu∣leius, and of the Chief of Heathenish Authors, that all Daemons are Evil. Whence he con∣cludes, That they cannot be Mediatours between God, and Men. He doth not believe, That Angels deserve that Title, affirming, That it belongeth to none but Jesus Christ alone.

In the Tenth Book he treateth at large of Angel Worship: He saith, That they are Crea∣tures, whose Felicity is all in God; that they worship God, and their Desire is, that all Men would worship him; that they require of us, neither Adoration, nor Sacrifices; and that God doth not expect from us Sacrifices, like those of the Heathen, but a Sarcifice of Union, such as the Church celebrates in the Eucharist, and which the Faithful know: That the Miracles which were wrought by the interposition of Angels, (not of Daemons, whose Prodigies are no∣thing but illusions:) These Miracles, I say, were wrought by God's Power, to make himself known unto Men: That the invisible God becomes visible by the ministry of his Angels, whom he made use of to deliver his Law to the World: That it is so true, that no Sacrifice is to be offered to any but God; that Jesus Christ, as Man, would be made a Sacrifice himself, and not receive one from any Body else: That God alone can purifie Men of their Sins, as the Platonists themselves acknowledge, that so it was necessary that God should be made Man to be a true Mediator: That the just Men, under the old Law, were not Saved, but by Faith in this Me∣diator: That Pride alone keeps the Platonists from owning the Incarnation: That the Soul is not Co-eternal with God, as they imagine: And Lastly, That the Means of delivering, the Soul which they sought after to so little purpose, is nothing but the Christian Religion.

In the 11th. Book, St. Augustin finds the Original of both Cities, in the diversity of Angels; which gives him occasion to treat of the Creation of the visible World, which was immediate∣ly preceded by that of the invisible, that is of the Angels whom he created all in a State of Righteousness, from which some are fallen through their own fault. He makes some digressi∣ons to speak of the Trinity, and of several Circumstances of the Creation of the VVorld.

Having proved in the 12th. That the difference of good, and evil Angels doth not proceed from their Nature, but from their VVill, because God created nothing but what was both Good, and Perfect. He comes to discourse of Mankind; and proves, That Men are not from Eternity, but that God created Man in time: And he mentions something, concerning the Fall of the First Man, whereof he speaks more at large in the 13th. Book, where he shews, That the death, both of Body and Soul, was the Consequence, and the Punishment of Adam's Fall. There one may meet with several curious Notions concerning Death; and several Reflections upon the Resurrection, and the Quality of glorified Bodies. He goes on in the 14th. Book, to speak of the Fall of the First Man, and of the lamentable Consequen∣ces that attended it, and particularly of irregular Desires, and shameful Passions. He en∣quires, VVhether the First Man was subject to Passions, and how he could Sin, being free from them. Lastly, He asketh several Questions, rather nice, than necessary, how Men should have had Children in the Earthly Paradise, had they continued in the State of Inno∣cence.

The Fifteenth Book is the first of those wherein he examineth the Progress of both the Ci∣ties: He finds the History of it in the Old Testament, where he shews who were the Citizens of both those Cities. This Book prosecutes this History from the Creation, to the Flood. On the one side, we see Abel, and Isaac, and on the other Cain, and Esau: And both these Cities may be taken notice of in the Marriages of the Sons of God, with the Daughters of

Men. The Church is represented by Noah's Ark. There are in this Book curious Allegories, and several Reflections upon the History of Genesis. Amongst other Things, he examines the length of the Lives of the First Patriarchs; and the Difference betwixt the Translation of the Septuagint, and the Hebrew Text, about the Number of the Generations.

In the 16th. Book he carries on the History of both Cities, from Noah to Abraham, and from Abraham to the Kings of Israel. He doth not find that the Scripture takes notice of any that served God from Noah to Abraham. He speaks of the Posterity of the Children of Noah, of the Confounding of Languages, of the Antiquity of the Hebrew Tongue, and of the Multipli∣cation of Mankind. He questions whether there be Antipodes. In the rest of the Book he clears the History of Abraham, and of his Posterity, which is explained with relation to the City of God.

In the 17th. taking a View of the History both of the Kings and of the Prophets, he relates and expounds the Prophecies which are in the Books of Kings, in the Psalms, and in the Books of Solomon, which relate to Christ or his Church.

Now as he had quitted the History of the City of the World, when he was come to Abra∣ham, so he resumeth it in the beginning of the 18th. Book; which contains an Abridgment of the History of the Principal Monarchies in the VVorld, the times whereof he makes to agree with the History of the Bible; and he omits not to speak of the Fabulous Histories, and of the Metamorphoses. Afterwards, he quotes the Sibylline Oracles; but he insists most upon the Predictions of the Prophets, which he produces in all their Particulars. He speaks also of the Books of the Maccabees: and having made some Reflections upon the Authority of the History of the Canonical Books, and of the Translation of the LXX. he describeth in few words the Fall of the Jewish Empire; and so he comes to the Nativity of Jesus Christ, the Dispersion of the Jews, the Settlement of the Church, the Persecutions and Heresies which immediately followed. St. Augustin makes very ingenious Reflections upon all these Articles; and concludes this Book, by showing, That the End of the VVorld is Unknown; and he refutes a false Pre∣diction which the Heathens published, That the Christian Religion should last but Three hun∣dred sixty five Years.

The 19th. Book treateth of the End of both Cities: Each one aims at the chiefest Good; but the Inhabitants of the Terrestrial know so little of it, that their Philosophers, the Wisest among them, could never agree wherein it consisted. Varro reckoneth Two hundred eighty eight different Opinions of Philosophers about it. The Christian Religion discovers the Falsity of all those Opinions, by letting Man know, That he cannot be Happy in this Life, but only in Hope; because he cannot enjoy here Peace and perfect Tranquility.

The 20th. Book contains a Description of the Last Judgment, of the Renewing of the World, of the Resurrection, and of the Heavenly Jerusalem.

The 21st. treateth of the End of the Earthly City, and represents the Horror of the Tor∣ments of Daemons and Damned Men, and of the Eternal Fire of Hell. St. Augustin refutes the vain Reasons of those that doubt of it; and the Fancy of some, who affirmed, That those Torments should have an End, and that Men should be kept from them by the Intercession of the Saints, by the Use of Sacraments, and by Almsdeeds.

The Last Book is, concerning the Happiness which the Saints shall enjoy to Eternity. The main End which St. Augustin aims at there, is, To prove the Probability of Man's Resurrection. His chief Reason is grounded upon Christ's Resurrection; attested by such credible Witnesses, that none can rationally doubt of it, the truth thereof having been confirmed by so many Mi∣racles. But because Unbelievers demanded why Miracles were not still wrought, St. Augustin mentions several that were done in his time, which he pretends to be very certain, and very well attested. He speaks again of the Condition of Glorified Bodies, and Crowns his Work with an excellent Pourtraicture of the Happiness of the Saints.

How great (saith he) will be that Felicity that shall be disturbed with no Evil, and where no other Business shall be followed but singing the Praises of God, who shall be all in all?... There will be found True Glory, where there is neither Error nor Flattery. There is True Honour; since it it is refused to none that deserve it, and it is not given to any that deserve it not; yea, where no Unworthy Person shall pretend to it, because there shall be none there but such as are Worthy. There will be True Peace, where a Man shall suffer nothing either from himself, or from other Men. He that is the Author of Vertue, shall himself be the Reward of it; because there is nothing better than He. He shall be the End of our Desires, whom we shall See to be without End, whom we shall Love without Disgust, and Praise without Weari∣ness. This Employment will be common to all Men, as well as Eternal Life; but it is im∣possible to know what degree of Glory shall be proportionable to each Man's Merit; and yet it is certain, that there is a great difference betwixt the Happiness of the one and of the other. But one of the great Advantages of that City, will be, That none shall envy those whom he shall see to be Above him.... Every one shall enjoy a Happiness, some greater, and others less; but every one shall have this Gift, Not to desire a greater than what he has. And we are not to imagine that Men shall be there without Free-Will, because they cannot take pleasure in Sin. For he will be so much the more Free, who shall be delivered from the Pleasure of Sinning, so as to take an unalterable Pleasure in not Sinning any more.... Wherefore, all the Inhabitants of this divine City shall have a Will perfectly

Free, exempt from all Evil, fill'd with all manner of Good, enjoying without intermission the Delights of an Immortal Joy, without remembrance either of his Faults or of his Miseries, otherwise than to bless their Deliverer for the same.

They have left out in this Edition the Commentaries both of Ludovicus Vives, and of Leo∣nardus Coquaeus; which exceeded the Text of St. Augustin by much, and which served but little to understand it, though otherwise full of Learning and Erudition.

These Books of St. Augustin are very pleasant, for the surprising variety of the things which he hath brought in to serve his purpose, so as all to tend to the same end. Their Learning is generally admired; yet they contain nothing but what is taken out of Cicero, Varro, Seneca, and other profane Authors, whose Works were common enough in those days; and one may say, that there is nothing very curious or elaborate; and in some places he is not exact, and he does not directly resolve most of the Difficulties which he proposes both upon the Text, and upon the History of the Books of the Bible. He discusses very useless Questions, and sometimes makes use of Reasons too weak to persuade those that would doubt of what he intends to prove; yet for all that, this is a most excellent Book: What I most admire in it, is, the Ma∣nagement of the whole Work, the judicious Reflections which he makes upon the Opinions therein related, and the great Principles of Morality which he layeth down upon Oc∣casion.

At the latter end of this Volume there are some Letters which have some relation to what St. Augustin saith in the 8th. Chapter of the last Book of the Miracles that were done in his time. The First is one of Avitus, upon the Translation of a Letter written by Lucianus, concerning the Discovering of St. Stephen's Body. With this Translation, they have added ano∣ther Tract, translated out of Greek by Anastasius the Library-Keeper, about another Discovery of St. Stephen's Relicks at Constantinople. They have likewise placed their Bishop Severus's Let∣ter, touching the Miracles happened in the Island Minorca, at the appearing of St. Stephen's Relicks for the Conversion of the Jews: And two Books ascribed to Evodius, Bishop of Uzala, concerning St. Stephen's Miracles; which have been mentioned already.

The EIGHTH TOME.

THE Eighth Volume of St. Augustin's Works, contains his Writings against Hereticks, ex∣cepting those that are against both the Donatists and the Pelagians, which make up two * 1.165 distinct Volumes. It begins with the small Treatise of Heresies, composed in the Year 428. at the Request of Quodvultdeus, a Deacon, to whom it is directed.

This Writing was to have had Two Parts: The First, concerning the Heresies raised from Jesus Christ's to St. Augustin's time. He promised to examine, in the Second, what it is that makes a Man an Heretick. This Second should naturally have been the First; because that to know the Heresies that have broken out since Jesus Christ's time, it is necessary to know what is Heresie. But St. Augustin finding this Question hard to be resolved, began with the other that was more easie, and never undertook the Second. Therefore this Treatise is only a very succinct Catalogue of the Names of Heretical Sects, and of their principal Errors. It beginneth with the Symonians, and endeth with the Pelagians, and containeth Eighty eight Heresies: it is by no means exact, and one shall hardly find any thing there which is not taken out of St. Epiphanius and Philastrius.

The Treatise against the Jews, is a Sermon in which St. Augustin proves by the Prophecies, That the Jewish Law was to have an End; That it was to be changed into a New Law; and, That God would reject the Jews, to call the Gentiles.

These Two short Treatises are follow'd by St. Augustin's Writings against the Manichees; which are set down in the first place, because those Hereticks opposed the first Principles of the Christian Religion. The First of all, is that of the Usefulness of Faith, which St. Augustin com∣posed sometime after he was Ordained Priest, in the Year 391. to reclaim his Friend Honoratus from the Errors of the Manichees, wherein he had been engaged as well as St. Augustin; be∣cause those Hereticks had put him in hope, That without making use of Authority, they should discover the Truth to him by the Light of Reason, and by this one only mean bring him to the Knowledge of God, and deliver him from all sorts of Errors. St. Augustin having shewed the difference betwixt the Author of a Heresie, and a Person surprized with it afterwards, doth at first justifie the Old Testament; shewing, That it agreeth exactly with the New, in the History, Morals and Allegories; and that the Church puts such a sense upon it, which the Manichees themselves cannot condemn. He overthroweth the Manichees Principle; proving, That we must Believe before we Know. To this end, he supposes certain Persons having no Religion, and seeking to be instructed in the True, to be like those who should enquire after a Master to teach them Rhetorick or Philosphy. Afterwards he observes, That the only Party which these Persons are to embrace at first, is to side with those who are commonly and generally approved: That it is great Rashness in those who are incapable of themselves to judge of things, to depart from the Common Voice; to preferr the Judgment of some particular Men, before that of the Multitude. So that it is most rational, since one Party or other is to be embraced, to side

with the Catholick Church, especially because it forbids not those that come into her to enquire after the Truth. It saith indeed, That we ought to Believe: But it hath an Authority so to * 1.166 do; for no Man can Believe, but he must be persuaded, That He in whom he believeth, is worthy of Credit; and this makes the difference betwixt a VVise and a Credulous Man. But had it not been better to give convincing Reasons of Things? No; for all Men are not capable of Reason, and some things cannot be understood without the help of a Divine Light. It is very dangerous to follow those who promise to make us comprehend all things; because they often boast of knowing what they are ignorant of, and often make us believe so too. And very shameful is that Condition, for Two Reasons: First, Because such a Person takes no more Pains to learn, being falsely persuaded of his Knowledge: And, Secondly, Because that an in∣considerate readiness to judge of a thing, is a Mark of a weak Understanding. Reason makes us apprehend things, Authority makes us believe, but Error persuades us to affirm rashly that which is false. Upon these Principles St. Augustin proves the Necessity of Faith, in Matters of Civil Life, as much as in Matters of VVisdom: For in the first place, the VVhole of Humane Society is grounded upon the Belief of some certain Things. As for Example: The Honour we render to our Parents, is grounded merely upon our Belief, That they are the Persons from whom we received Life. Secondly, There is no getting of VVisdom, without con∣sulting with VVise Men. But how shall we know these VVise Men, except we trust Others? For unless we are VVise our selves, we can never know True VVisdom. VVherefore, we must Believe, to seek after Religion: For did we not believe that there is such a thing, why should we seek for it? All Hereticks own that we must believe in Jesus Christ: But what Motives have we to believe Jesus Christ's Authority? Are they not the same with those that make us believe the Church? Are they not the Miracles, the Sanctity both of the Doctrine and of the Morals, the Publishing of the Gospel, the Blood of Martyrs, and some other Proofs of this nature, which establish the Authority of the Church no less than that of Jesus Christ? Therefore St. Augustin concludes thus,

Why should we make any difficulty to throw our selves into the Arms of that Church which hath always maintain'd her self by the Succession of Bishops in Apostolick Sees, in spite of all the Endeavours of Hereticks condemned by her, or by Peoples Faith, or by the Decisions of Councils, or by the Authority of Miracles? It is either a matchless Impiety, or a very indiscreet Arrogancy, not to acknowledge her Doctrine for a Rule of our Faith. For if the Spirit of Man cannot attain unto Wisdom, and so to Salvation, but by Faith directing our Reason; is it not to be Ungrateful, and neglect the Succour proffered by God, to resist so weighty an Authority? And truly, if any Science, though common and easie, cannot be learned without a Teacher; it is Presumption, in the highest degree, to refuse to learn the Sence of the Sacred Books from those that understand them; and to condemn them, without hearing what they say.

After this First Book against the Foundation of the Manichaean Heresie, St. Augustin com∣posed the Book Of the Two Souls, against one principal Error of those Hereticks; asserting, That there were Two Souls in each Man; a Good one, of a Divine Substance, the cause of all that is Good in us; and an Evil one, of the nature of Darkness, proper to the Flesh, which is the Principle of all disorderly Motions, and of all the Evil that we doe. St. Augustin proves in this Book, First, That the Soul being a Spirit and Life, is more perfect than Corporeal Light, which the Manichees believe to come from God. Secondly, That there is no Nature or Sub∣stance naturally Evil; and that Evil consists only in the Abuse of our Liberty. Some Passages in this Book attribute much to Free-Will; nay, there are some which may not agree well with the Doctrine of Grace, and of Original Sin, which St. Augustin correcteth in his Re∣tractations.

There was at that time in Hippo a Priest, one Fortunatus, a Famous Manichee, who had se∣duc'd many Inhabitants of that City. The Catholicks engaged St. Augustin, in a Conference with him. What was said on both Sides, was set down in Writing by Notaries, and that Act preserved among St. Augustin's Writings. The Dispute lasted but two Days; and the Questions that were disputed about, were of Nature, and the Original of Evil. St. Augustin affirms, That Evil proceeds from the Abuse of Free-Will. The Manichee pretends, That there is an Evil Nature Co-eternal with God. In the first day's Conference the Manichee defended himself well enough; but he could not Answer St. Augustin's Objections next day, and was obliged to say, That he would conferr about them with the Heads of his Sect. The Shame of being Confuted in that Conference, obliged him to leave Hippo. This Conference is dated the 26th. of August, under the Second Consulship of Arcadius and Rufinus, in the Year 392.

About that time, St. Augustin met with some Works of one Adimantus, who had been a Disciple of Manichaeus, written against the Law and the Prophets; which he affirmed to contain things contrary to the Precepts of the Gospel and of the Apostles. He undertook to Answer the Objections of that Heretick, and to Justifie the Agreement betwixt those Passages of the Old and New Testament which he had produced, as being contrary. This Book is of the Year 394.

St. Augustin having refuted the Disciple, undertakes the Master, and Answereth the Letter which he called, The Epistle of Foundation: shewing, That Manichaeus set forth in it nothing but Falshods and Absurdities. He lays down, at first, the Reasons for his adhering to the Church, in these Terms:

Not to speak (saith he) of that Wisdom and Understanding which

few Men apprehend in this Life, several Motives keep me in the Bosom of the Catholick Church; The general Consent of Nations and People, an Authority grounded upon Miracles, upheld by Hope, perfected with Charity, and confirmed by Antiquity; the Succession of Bishops from St. Peter to our time; and the Name of the Catholick Church, which is so peculiar to the True Church, that though all Hereticks call themselves Catholicks, yet when you ask, in any Country whatsoever, where Catholicks meet, they dare not shew the Place of their Assemblies. These are powerful Motives which keep a faithful Man within the Pale of the Church, though he be not yet arrived to a perfect understanding of the Truth. But among you Manichees, that have none of these Reasons either to invite or to keep me, I hear none but vain Promises, to make me understand the Truth clearly. I confess, That did you perform it, I ought to preferr an evident Truth, which none can doubt of, before all the Motives that make me keep to the Catholick Church. But so long as you do only promise, and not give this Knowledge, you shall not shake that Trust which I have in the Catholick Church, which is grounded upon such powerful Reasons and Motives.

He examines af∣terwards the Principles contained in Manichaeus's Letter; and proves, That he not only fails in the Demonstration of what he affirmeth, but that he is contrary even to Reason and Common S••nce. This Book is placed in the Retractations, among the Books composed bout the Year 397.

The most considerable of all St. Augustin's Works against the Manichees, is, his Treatise against Faustus, divided into Three and thirty Disputes or Arguments; wherein he writes down the Text of this Manichee's Books, which contained most part of the Blasphemies and Impieties of those Hereticks, against both the Old and the New Testament: which St. Au∣gustin strongly and solidly refutes. This Work was compleated about the Year 400. and sent to St. Jerom in 404.

The next Book contains the Acts of a Conference which St. Augustin had at Hippo, in De∣cember, 404. with a Manichee, one Felix. The Dispute lasted three Days, but we have a Re∣lation but of what happened in the two last Conferences. In the Conclusion of the latter, the Manichee was Converted, and Anathematized Manichaeus.

In the same Year, St. Augustin composed a Treatise Of the Nature of Good, against the Ma∣nichees: wherein he shews, That God is of an Immutable Nature: That he hath created all other Beings, whether Spiritual or Corporeal, which are all good in their Nature: That Evil proceedeth only from the Abuse of Free-Will: That the Manichees call Evil Good, and Good Evil.

The Book against Secundinus, is properly an Answer of St. Augustin's to that Manichee, who had exhorted him by a Letter, never to encounter with the Manichees, of whose Opinion himself had been formerly; and he had also urged him to return to their Sect. St. Augustin gives him the Reasons of his Conversion, and discovers some of Manichaeus's Errors.

The following Treatise is against a Heretick who was worse than the Manichees, who in a distinct Treatise asserted, That God did not make the World, nor give the Law. St. Augustin refuteth him, under the Name of The Adversary of the Law and the Prophets, in two Books bearing that Title, composed about the Year 420.

Orosius having consulted St. Augustin, in 415. about the Impieties of the Priscillianists, and some Errors of Origen's Disciples, St. Augustin answered him in a Book directed to him, enti∣tuled, Against the Priscillianists and Origenists. In this small Treatise he rejects these Errors: 1. That the Soul is of a Divine Nature. 2. That the Torments both of the Daemons and of Damned Men shall have an end. 3. That the Reign of Jesus Christ will not be Eternal. 4. That both Angels and Souls are Purified in this World. 5. That the Stars are Animated. 6. That Angels commit Sins.

The rest of St. Augustin's Treatises contained in this Volume are against the Arians.

The First is an Answer to a Discourse of an Arian, containing a great many Objections against the Divinity of the Son of God, and of the Holy Ghost. This Discourse was made the next Year after the Conference with Emeritus, held in 417.

Next to this Treatise, are, The Conference with Maximinus, and Two Books against that Arian Bishop. The Conference was held at Hippo, in the Year 428. whither Maximinus was sent by Count Sigisvultdeus. In the Conference were several Discourses on both Sides; but Maximinus having said many more things than St. Augustin, and spoken last, he bragg'd that he had got the Victory: which obliged this Saint to recollect all that had been said in the Conference, and to refute Maximinus's last Arguments, which he had not had time to answer.

St. Austin's Books of the Trinity, are rather a Dogmatical Treatise, concerning that Mystery, than Polemical Writings against Hereticks; for he insisteth not so much upon refuting their Reasons, or establishing the Doctrines of the Church, as upon subtile Reasonings, to expound and clear this Mystery. He began them in the Year 400. and finished them in 416. The First Book begins with a Preface containing very important Reflections. He observes, at first, That Men have Three false Notions of the Divinity; that some conceive of God as a Corporeal Substance, attributing to him Corporeal Properties; that others have such an Idea of him, as they have of their Souls, and of other Spirits; and so they ascribe to him the like Imper∣fections, as Repenting, Forgetting, and Remembring,; and that others entertain such a No∣tion of God, as may have nothing Common with a Creature; and so they conceive none but

Chimerical Idea's of him. The Holy Scripture condescends to Men's Weakness, ascribing often such Things to God, as belong properly to Bodies, or imperfect Spirits; and seldom makes use of Terms peculiar to God, because it is very difficult to know, in this Life, the Substance, or Essence of the divine Nature perfectly. But because some Persons desire to be informed about this Matter, and ask how Three divine Persons make one and the same Essence, he un∣dertakes two things in this Work: First, To shew, That the Scripture teaches us such Doctrine; and then to raise the Mind, as far as it is capable in this Life, to the knowledge of this My∣stery.

He proves the First Point in the first Seven Books.

In the First, he establishes, by Passages of Scripture, the Unity, and the Equality of the Three Divine Persons; and explains the principal Places that were urged by the Arians, against the Divinity of Jesus Christ. The main Rule which he makes use of, is That Jesus Christ being one only Person, made up of Two Natures, what is said of the humane Nature should be distinguished from that which is spoken of the Divine.

In the Second, he confirmeth the former Rule, and layeth down another. That the Scri∣pture speaks things of the Son, and the Holy Ghost, which are not spoken of the Father, to shew, That they receive their Essence from the Father: As when 'tis said, That the Son doth nothing of himself; that he receiveth Life from the Father. This, saith St. Augustin, doth not shew, That the Son is of a different Nature from the Father, but only, that the Son receiveth his Substance from the Father. And by this Rule, he explains the mission of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. He speaks also of Apparitions; wherein he pretends, That not one single Per∣son, but the whole Trinity, hath either spoken, or operated.

This last Question is the Subject of his Third Book; wherein he examines, Whether God, in his Apparitions, formed Creatures to make himself known unto Men by them; or, Whether th••se Apparitions were by the Ministry of Angels, who made use of Bodies to accomplish them. He concludes, in favour of the latter Opinion, rejecting the former, which had been held by all the Fathers before him.

The Fourth is about Christ's Incarnation, whereby God hath manifested how much he loved us. The Word was made Flesh, to deliver us from the Darkness wherein we lay, to purifie our Hearts, and Minds. His Death delivered us from Two kinds of Death; from that of the Body, by restoring Immortality to us; and from that of the Soul, by washing us from our Sins. Here he makes a Digression, concerning the perfection of the Number Six, which is neither very solid, nor much to the Purpose. He discourses afterwards of the wonderful Ef∣fects of Christ's Mediation; and shews, at last, That the Humiliation of the Son of God, by his Incarnation, hinders him not from being equal with his Father, according to the Divine Nature.

In the Fifth Book, He refutes the Sophisms of Hereticks against the Mystery of the Trinity.

In the Sixth, He considers in what sence the Son is called the Wisdom and Power of the Fa∣ther: Whether the Father be Wise of himself; or, Whether he is only the Father of Wisdom. He puts off the Decision of that Question, and treats again of the Unity and Equality of the Father, of the Son, and of the H. Ghost.

In the Seventh Book he resolves the Question proposed in the Sixth, shewing that the Father is not only the Father of Power and of Wisdom, but that he hath in himself both Power and Wisdom; and that all the Three Persons of the Trinity are Wise and Powerful by the same Power and Wisdom, because they have but one Godhead. Afterwards he explains in what sence God is said to have but one Essence and Three Persons; or, according to the Greeks, three Hypostases.

Having proved in the Eighth Book that the Three Persons together are not greater than any one alone, he enters upon the Second Part of his Work by exhorting Men to raise up themselves to the Knowledge of God, thro' Charity, wherein he finds a kind of Trinity.

In the Ninth, He endeavoureth to find a Trinity in Man, who was created after the Image of God; he findeth there a Spirit, a Knowledge of himself, and a Love wherewith he loves himself: these three Things are equal among themselves, and make but one Essence. This is according to S. Augustin, an Image of the Trinity. Memory, Understanding, and Will, fur∣nish him with another, which he believes is clearer and more like. He explains it in the Tenth Book. He finds some resemblances even in the outward Man, in the inward Senses, in Know∣ledge and Wisdom: and these are the Subjects of the following Books.

He concludeth at last, in the Fifteenth Book, That though we have here below several Re∣presentations of the Trinity, yet we should not seek for it, but in immutable and eternal Things, and that we cannot see it in this Life, but by a Figure, and Enigmatically: And thus he pre∣tends, That we have an Idea of the Generation of the Word, by the production of the Word of our Understanding, and an Idea of the proceeding of the Holy Ghost, by the Love that proceeds from the Will. But he confesseth, That these Notions are very imperfect; and that there is an infinite Difference betwixt these Comparisons, and the Mystery of the Trinity.

The Treatise of the Five Heresies, or rather the Sermon preached against Five sorts of Ene∣mies to the Christians, Heathens, Jews, Manichees, Sabellians, and Arians, which the Louvain Doctors had ascribed to St. Augustin, though Erasmus doubted of it, is thrown in this Edi∣tion, amongst the supposititious Treatises. And this was done with a great deal of Reason;

for the Stile thereof is very different from St. Augustin's: And the Author of that Sermon preached it, when Arianism was the predominant Religion in Africa, as appears by the 6th. and 7th. Chapters; which shews, That St. Augustin is not the Author of it, but some other African who lived at the time of the Vandal's Persecution. The Sermon of the Creed against the Hea∣thens, Jews, and Arians, is also of the same time, and probably of the same Author.

The Suit betwixt the Church, and the Synagogue, is the Work of some Lawyer, who try'd to Exercise himself, in making the Church to condemn the Synagogue, after the same manner that a Judge condemns a Malefactor.

The Book of Faith, against the Manichees, is restor'd to Evodius of Uzala, upon the Autho∣rity of ancient Manuscripts, and the different Stile.

The following Memorial, of the manner of admitting the Manichees, that were converted into the Churth, is very Ancient; and, in all probability, it is an Order of some Council of Africa.

The Book of the Unity of the Trinity, is here restored to Vigilius Tapsensis, the true Author, who citeth it himself in the Preface to his Books, against Varimadus, to whom it is attributed in an ancient Copy.

Both the Books of the Incarnation of the Word, are taken, as it is observed, out of the Tran∣slation of Origen's Principles by Rufinus.

The Treatise of the Unity, and Trinity of God, is made up of Extracts out of several Passa∣ges of St. Augustin's Works, both Genuine, and Spurious.

The Book of the Essence of the Divinity, which is likewise attributed to St. Ambrose, St. Jerom, St. Anselm, and Bonaventure, is partly taken out of a Book, written by St. Eucherius.

The Dialogue of the Unity of the Holy Trinity, was found in Two Manuscripts, Eight Hun∣dred Years old; in one of them it is ascribed to St. Augustin, yet it is clearly written in a diffe∣rent Stile from his.

The Book of Ecclesiastical Maxims, ought to be quite expunged out of St. Augustin's Works, to which it hath no relation; yet it is quoted under that Holy Father's Name, by the Master of the Sentences; and it beareth his Name in several Manuscripts. Trithemius ascribes it to Alcuinus; and Gratian citeth it under the Name of Paterus: But the vulgar Opinion is, That Gennadius writ it, to whom it is attributed by Algerus, Walafridus Strabo, the Master of the Sentences, and Thomas Aquinas in several Places. It is likewise cited, under his Name, in several MSS. This Book contains an Abridgment of the principal Articles of Religion. It is evident, That the Author thereof was not of St. Augustin's Opinion, concerning Grace, and Free-Will. They have left out some Articles which had been inserted after the 21st. and taken out of St. Coelestine's Epistles to the Bishops of Gaul, of the Council of Carthage, and that of Orange.

The NINTH TOME.

THE Ninth Volume of St. Augustin's Works, containeth his Treatises against the Dona∣tists. * 1.167

The First is a Hymn which St. Augustin composed in vulgar, and popular Terms, to teach the most unlearned the State of the Question betwixt the Catholicks, and the Donatists, and to exhort these to a Re-union with the Catholicks. This Writing, which consists but of Two Leaves, is proper, as St. Augustin himself observes, for none but very ordinary People.

In 393. he wrote a Book against Donatus his Epistle; and in 398. Two Books against the Donatists: But both these Treatises are lost.

We are therefore to begin St. Augustin's VVorks against the Donatists, from the Three Books against the Epistle of Parmenianus, who succeeded Donatus in the See of Carthage. There he refutes the Letter which that Schismatick wrote to Tychonius, wherein he accused the whole Church of being defiled, for communicating with Persons that were guilty of several Crimes. St. Augustin having proved, That Caecilian, and the greatest part of the others, who were ac∣cused by the Donatists, had been declared Innocent; addeth, That though the Crimes, whereof they accused particular Men, were proved, yet the Church would still be the true Church, tho' she had not cut them off from her Communion because she is made up of good and bad Men, and that even these may be tolerated for Peace sake. These Books were compos'd about the Year 400. We must not forget to observe, That there is in this Edition, chap. 3d. of the First Book, a very important Correction of a Passage which had much perplexed Historians. S. Augustin speaks there of the Roman Council which condemned the Donatists: and they made him say in the common Editions, and in most Manuscripts, that this Council consisted of Two Hundred Bishops. Usque adeo dementes sunt homines, ut ducentos judices, apud quos victi sunt, victis litigatoribus credat: and because this was not sence, they added against the Authority of the MSS. esse postponendos. It being certain that S. Augustin speaketh in this Place of the Coun∣cil of Rome, and that there met but 19 Bishops; they thought that 19 were to be put instead of 200. But the restoration made here upon the Credit of the Vatican Manuscript, resolves all the Difficulty, and clears the Sence, without adding any thing. Neither 19 nor 200, are men∣tioned

in the Text. Thus it runs, Usque adea dementes sunt homines, ut CONTRA judices vi∣ctis litigatoribus credat. It appears at the first sight, that this is the true Sence, which all the Con∣jectures * 1.168 of the Learned could not find out. They took the Contra, made short with Two C. C. for the Cypher of 200, and they had writ ducentos instead of this Cypher at all Adventures; and because the Text was then not Sence, the Louvain Doctors added Esse Postponendos after Credat. One single Manuscript discovers presently those Mistakes, and gives the true Sence. And now let Men say, That there is no need of comparing the Authors to be published with ancient Ma∣nuscripts. But to return to our Subject.

The Seven Books Of Baptism were composed by St. Augustin at the same time. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 under∣takes there to refute the Donatists, who used St. Cyprian's Authority, to defend their Opinion concerning the Nullity of Baptism administred by Hereticks. He shews, That if that Saint seems to favour them in that Point, yet his Practice and Doctrine condemn'd their Separation. He refutes also the Reasons which that Saint and his Collegues urged to prove, That those were to be re-baptized, who had been baptized by Hereticks. There he handleth several Questions touching the Necessity, Validity, Effect, and other Circumstances of Baptism.

After the Books Of Baptism, St. Augustin placeth a Treatise which he composed against a cer∣tain Book brought by Centurius from the Donatists. But that Discourse is lost: And so imme∣diately after the Books of Baptism, follow Three Books against a Letter of Petilianus Bishop of the Donatists at Cirta. The First of these Books is written in the form of a Letter to the Church: Therein he refutes the First Part of Petilianus's Letter. But having received after∣wards the whole Letter, he thought himself obliged to answer every Proposition by it self. Whil'st this was doing, Petilianus having seen the Letter that St. Augustin writ at first, returned an Answer; to which, St. Augustin opposed a Third Book, wherein without insisting upon Pe∣tilianus's reproachful Language, he discovers the weakness of the Answers that he brought in defence of his Party. The First of these Books, which is rather a Letter than a Book, was com∣posed about the Year 400. both the others are of 402.

The next Book is likewise written against Petilianus, and is intituled in the Manuscripts, A Letter from St. Augustin to the Catholicks concerning the Sect of the Donatists: And Possidius seems to have mention'd it under this Title, in the Third Article of his Index. It is likewise cited under this Title, and ascribed to St. Augustin in the Fifth Council, Collat. 5. Yet St. Augustin does not mention it in his Retractations. It may be answered, That this Book being written in the form of a Letter, he reserved to speak of it in the other part of his Retractations, which was to contain his Sermons and Letters. And yet we see that St. Augustin speaks of Dogmatical Treatises that were long, though composed in the form of Letters, in this Part; so that it is un∣likely that he should have forgot to mention this, when he spoke of his other Letters against Petilianus. The Benedictines have made some other Observations upon this Treatise, which may make us doubt whether it is St. Augustin's, or no. They observe, That the Salutation in the beginning, Salus quae in Christo est, is extraordinary, and that St. Augustin never used it. They find improper forms of Speech, Transitions, Figures and Expressions, not very elegant, which do not agree to St. Augustin's Stile. Nay, besides they take notice of a Point of Doctrine different from St. Augustin's. For the Author of this Book teaches in the 13th. Chapter, That the Separation of the Ten Tribes from Judah, was no Heresie; but St. Augustin affirms in the 23d. Epistle, and in his First Book against Cresconius, Chapter 31st. That the Samaritans made a Schism, a Sect, and an Heresie. And lastly, They have Collected some Passages of Scripture which are not of that Translation, which St. Augustin uses in other places. They add. That the Author of this Book, Chapter 24th. doubts whether the Water that issued out of our Saviour's Side, was a figure of Baptism; which St. Augustin sets down for a certain Truth in several places of his Writings.

These Objections are not unanswerable: St. Augustin hath not mention'd all his Works in his Retractations, and particularly, those that are in the form of Letters. We have already taken notice of some that he has omitted. This is found in Possidius's Catalogue, and the Author de∣clares in the beginning, That he had written already against Petilianus's Letter; The Stile, in∣deed, is not so Elegant as of some other of St. Augustin's Works; but it is no wonder, because it is a Letter that was to be seen and understood by all Mankind. For the same reason, the Hymn against the Donatists might be rejected, which is much flatter, and containing more bar∣barous Expressions. The Salutation agrees very well to the Subject, and is not unworthy of St. Augustin: And if he never used it in other places, it doth not follow that he should forbear it in this. When St. Augustin reckoned the Samaritans among the Heretical Jews, he did not speak of the ancient Inhabitants of Samaria, immediately after the division of the Tribes, but of the later Samaritans, who were real Hereticks among the Jews. Lastly, It is no extraordinary thing for St. Augustin to cite some places of Scripture in other terms than he had used in other places; or that he should doubt here of some things, whereof he speaks more affirmatively at other times.

Though these Answers should not be sufficient to remove all suspicion, yet it is certain, That this Book was written in St. Augustin's time; and all that can be said is, That it might have been drawn up by some of his Friends, and directed in his Name to the Donatists. It was written in 402. after the Second Book against Petilianus, and before the Third; It is a new Challenge which he sendeth to this Bishop to defend his own Party, and to shew that the true

Church is on his side. He describes the Marks of the true Church, and proves, That they do not agree with the Donatists Party, but with that of the Catholicks; and then answereth those Passages which the Donatists urged for themselves, and the Accusations which they formed against the Church.

One Cresconius, a Grammarian, of the Donatists Party, undertook to defend Petilianus against St. Augustin's first Writing. As soon as he saw his Letter, he refuted it in three Books, and re∣torted upon him all his Arguments, by retorting in a Fourth Book the business of the Maxi∣mianists. These Books were written about the Year 406.

Here should have been placed Three other Treatises against the Donatists, which he mentions in his Retractations, but they are lost. These were, A Book of Proofs and Testimonies against the Donatists; A Treatise against a Donatist; And an Advice to the Donatists about the Business of the Maximianists.

The Book of one Baptism, against Petilianus, was written after the Conference at Carthage. The Principal Question treated of by St. Augustin, is concerning the Validity of Baptism admi∣nistred by Hereticks.

St. Augustin being willing to Publish an Account of the Conference of Carthage, wrote a Bre∣viary of what was said in the three Days Conference, in 412.

He wrote a Book likewise directed to the Donatists, with the same Design; wherein he makes several Reflections upon the Conference of Carthage, that he might perfectly undeceive that Party, and shew that they were seduc'd and deceived by their Bishops. He likewise answereth their Cavils against the Judgment of Marcellinus. This Book is of the Year 413.

The Treatise to Emeritus a Donatist Bishop, who was one of the principal Defenders of that Party in the Conference at Carthage, is lost. St. Augustin had collected there the main Points, wherein they had been baffled, as he says, in the 49th. Chapter of the Second Book of his Retra∣ctations. After this he went to Caesarea, a City of Mauritania, where he met with Emeritus, before whom he Preached a Sermon to perswade him to reconcile himself to the Church; but not prevailing by this means, he held a Conference with him, about those things which had been done in the Conference at Carthage; and then pressed him so hard upon the Quarrel of the Maximianists, that Emeritus had nothing to say: This Conference was held in the presence of the Bishops, Clergy, and People, the 20th. of September 413. or 418. for the Manuscripts do not well agree about the Consul's Names.

At last, Gaudentius one of the Seven Donatist Bishops who defended their Party in the Con∣ference at Carthage, being pressed by the Threatnings of Dulcitius, writ two Letters, which St. Augustin answers in his First Book against this Donatist Bishop; which is particularly to ju∣stifie the severity exercised towards them. Gaudentius willing to answer something, wrote a Discourse; wherein, without meddling with the Contest betwixt them, he justified his Party, and calumniated the Church. St. Augustin answereth this Treatise in the Second Book. Both these Books of St. Augustin are of the Year 420.

There is a Sermon attributed to St. Augustin, concerning one Rusticianus, a Sub-deacon, who was Re-baptized by the Donatists, and then Ordained Deacon; but this Discourse does not agree to St. Augustin, as it is proved in the Preface. This Volume ends with a Catalogue of St. Au∣gustin's Works against the Donatists, which are in the other Volumes of St. Augustin's Works. We have not spoken particularly of the Matters handled by St. Augustin, in every Book against the Donatists; because he commonly repeateth the same Arguments, and so we should have been obliged to say often the same things, and for which Reason it was put off to this place; that so I might give an Abridgment of his Doctrine, and a Breviary of his chief Reasons all at once.

It has been observ'd already, That the Donatists began their Schism by a Separation of some African Bishops, who accused Caecilian of several Crimes, whereof they had been convicted them∣selves. Though they had been condemned in the Council of Rome, in that of Arles, and at last by Constantine's Judgment, yet they remained firm to their own Opinions, and would by no means be reconciled to the Church. Their Party also was much strengthned by the great num∣ber of Bishops whom they ordained, almost in every Church of Africa, and by the Multitudes of People whom they drew after them: So that in St. Augustin's time, their Party was very near as strong in Africa, as that of the Catholicks. But they held no Communion with all the other Churches in the World, which acknowledged Caecilian, his Successors, and those of that Party, for the true Church.

The Donatists in their own defence affirm'd, That Caecilian, Felix of Aptungis, who ordained him, Miltiades that absolved him, and several others of his Brethren, having been convicted of certain Crimes, ought to be deposed and expelled out of the Church; That their Crime made them cease to be Members of the Church, which ought to be pure and without blemish; That as many as defended them and had Communicated with them, were become Accessaries to their Crime by approving it; and that so, not only the Churches of Africa, but even all the other Churches in the World, which held Communion with the Churches of Caecilian's Party, having been defiled, ceased to be Parts of the true Church of Jesus Christ, that was then reduced to the small number of those who would not partake with Prevaricators; but kept themselves in the Primitive Purity. Besides this, They charged the Church with another great Crime, as they esteemed it; which was, That they made Application to the Emperor's Authority to Persecute

their Party; and that they caused several Violences to be exercised against them. Now, they persisting in the Opinion of St. Cyprian, and of the ancient Bishops of Africa; who held, That Baptism by Hereticks and Schismaticks was invalid, and ought to be renew'd; a necessary Con∣sequence of their Principles, was the Rebaptizing of the Catholicks that came over to their Party.

These are the Grounds on which the Schism of the Donatists stood.

There were two ways to deal with them; either by denying the Matter of Fact, or by oppo∣sing the Matter of Right: Those who first writ against the Donatists, insisted most upon the Matter of Fact; that is, The Justification of Caecilian, Felix of Aptungis, and the rest. Neither doth St. Augustin omit this; for he often proves Caecilian's Innocency, by the Judgments given in his behalf; First, At Rome, by Pope Miltiades, and other Bishops; Secondly, In the Council of Arles; and at last, By the Judgment of Constantine. He adds, as an absolute Justification, the consent of all the Churches in the World, which had approved and followed the Judgment of those Councils. He likewise produces the Acts that were made to justifie Felix of Aptungis: He defends Miltiades and Hosius, against the Calumnies laid upon them. And shews at last, That the Donatists had no Proofs of what they alledged against the Catholick Bishops. But he doth not think this to be the main Point, and therefore he passes to the Matter of Right, and maintains, That though Caecilian, and the rest of his Brethren, had been guilty of the Crimes laid to their Charge; yet that was not a sufficient Ground for a Separation from the Church; and that the Church did not cease to be the Church, because it Communicated with wicked Men, since either she did not know them; or else, she bore with them to preserve Peace: which brings him to that great Question, Whether the Church here below is made up only of Saints and Righteous Men, or composed of Good and Bad. St. Augustin affirms, That there was always in the Church Chaff and Corn; that is, both good and wicked Men; and that such will be to the Day of Judgment, which shall divide the good from the bad; That sometimes the number of the latter exceeds that of the former; That many cannot be driven out of the Church, because they are not known, and because it is convenient to tolerate some for quietness sake, to prevent a Schism which might be occasioned by cutting off from the Communion those Persons who might draw along with them several of the Faithful; That it is great rashness to condemn all the Churches in the World, for the Crime of one or two; That the Catholick Church ought to be diffused over the whole Earth, and not confined to a small part of the World, as in a Corner of Africa. Here St. Augustin triumphs over his Adversaries, proving by Prophecies, and other Passages both of the Old and New Testament, That the Catholick Church was to have a considerable Extent.

These are properly the main Points in Controversie betwixt the Church and the Donatists; but there are other Secundary Questions.

The First, is concerning the Persecutions, which the Donatists imputed to the Church as a Crime. St. Augustin defends the Church very Modestly, either by disapproving such Violences, or by shewing that it was lawful to make use of the Imperial Laws, and of some sort of Seve∣rity to bring the Donatists back to the bosom of the Church. He chargeth them likewise with the same things; objecting the Cruelties, Violencies, Sacrileges and Murders committed by those of their Party called Circumcellians, and authorized thereunto by Optatus Gildonianus.

The other accessary Question, which St. Augustin looks upon as a principal one, is about the Validity of the Baptism of Hereticks. St. Augustin needed only to prove that his Party was the true Church, and so Condemn by a necessary Consequence the Donatists, for Rebaptizing those that had been baptized before by Catholicks, since it was agreed on both sides, that the Baptism of the true Church was valid. But St. Augustin undertook besides, to prove the validity of the Baptism of Hereticks and Schismaticks; And that though his Party were not the Church, yet the Donatists were not to baptize them a second time. He confesses, That St. Cyprian, and most of the African Bishops in his time were of a contrary opinion; That Agrippinus his Pre∣decessor, had appointed Hereticks to be Rebaptized; That St. Cyprian and the Councils held in Africa at that time, confirmed Agrippinus's Decree; That this Question remained long undeci∣ded, or rather variously decided in divers places. But that at last the thing was decided in a Plenary Council of the whole Church, (in all likelihood he means that of Arles) and that after such Determination, it was not permitted to doubt, because the Provincial or National Councils must give place to the Authority of Plenary Councils. That St. Cyprian was to be excused for not taking the right side of so hard a Question, which was not yet cleared or decided, and so much the rather, because he defended his own Opinion without making a Schism, and with the Spirit of Peace and Unity: However, That the Letters and Writings of the Saints were not to be rely'd upon, as the Apostles Epistles, and the other Books of the Holy Scripture.

Now to explain St. Augustin's Opinion touching Baptism more particularly, we are to ob∣serve as he doth, That Baptism may be said to be of two sorts; The one administred in the Name of the Trinity, that is, by invoking of the Trinity; and the other performed without naming the Three Divine Persons. The latter, St. Augustin confesses to be null; but affirms the other to be valid, whosoever he be that administers it. So that it matters not who baptizeth, provided that Baptism be in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Two things are likewise to be distinguished in Baptism, the Sacrament, and the Effect of the Sacrament: The Sacrament is found in those that are baptized by Hereticks; but because they have not Faith, they are deprived of the Effect: For, that Baptism may be complete, both as a

Sacrament, and as to its Effect, the Sacrament must be intire; that is, the Person must be bap∣tized outwardly in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and he that receives must believe and be converted. The Sacrament is often found without Faith, and Faith without the Sacrament. Children have the Sacrament without Faith. The good Thief had Faith without the Sacrament. God supplies in Children the Faith they want, and he sup∣plied in the good Thief the Sacrament which he could not receive. But when either of these is wanting, by the Man's own Fault, he cannot be excused; and he receiveth not the Effect of Baptism. When the Sacrament is found without Faith, and without Conversion, it is not ne∣cessary to be reiterated: It is sufficient only to supply what is wanting; as when one is already converted, it is enough to receive the Sacrament. The difference lieth in this, That the Adult cannot be saved without Faith and Conversion, though they may be saved without the Sacra∣ment, if so be that they do not want it through Contempt or Neglect, but because they lay under an impossibility of receiving it.

From these Principles, St. Augustin draws the following Conclusions: 1. That Baptism con∣ferred by Hereticks in the Name of the Trinity, is good and valid as it is a Sacrament, and ought not to be repeated. 2. That neither the Minister's Faith, as to Religion, nor his Sanctity avail any thing to the Validity of Baptism. 3. That it is God, and not the Minister who gives the Holy Spirit, and worketh the Remission of Sins. 4. That Baptism produces this Effect, but in them alone that are well-disposed by Faith and Conversion of the Heart. 5. That the Prayers of the Church, which consists of Saints and Righteous Men; supplies the Actual Faith, which Children cannot have. 6. That the Adult who have Faith and are Converted, may be saved with∣out actual receiving of the Sacrament, but not without the Sacramental Vow.

As for some other Questions which might be made about Baptism administred by Infidels, or some impious Persons that are Excommunicated or in jest. St. Augustin saith, in the Seventh Book of Baptism, Chap. 53d. thus,

It is asked, saith he, whether that Baptism is to be ap∣proved, which is administred by an unbaptized Person, who out of Curiosity hath learned the way of baptizing among Christians? It is asked further, Whether it be necessary for the Validity of Baptism that he, who either administers or receives it, be sincere? And if they should be only in jest, Whether Baptism ought to be administred again in the Church? Whether Baptism conferred in Derision, as that would be, which should be administred by a Comedian, might be accounted Valid? Whether it is more Criminal to receive Baptism in jest in the Church, or to receive it with the same Spirit, in Heresie or Schism? Whether Baptism administred by an Actor, may become Valid, when he that receives it is well-disposed.

St. Augustin answers to these and such-like Questions, That the securest way is to return no Answer to Questions that never were decided in any Council, General, or National. But he adds, Should any man, meeting with me at such Council, ask my Advice about these Que∣stions, and that it were my turn to declare my Opinion, having not heard other Mens Opi∣nions, which I might preferr before mine own, and if I perceiv'd in my self the same Dispo∣sitions that I am now in, I should without difficulty acknowledge, That they all receive Baptism truly in any place whatsoever, and by whomsoever administred, if on their part they receive it with Faith, and with Sincerity. I am apt also to believe, That such as receive Bap∣tism in the Church, or in what is supposed to be the Church, are truly baptized as to the Sacramental part of the Action whatsoever be their intention. But as for Baptism admini∣stred and received out of the Church, in Raillery, Contempt, and to make Sport; I could not approve the same without a Revelation.

These are St. Augustin's Opinions concerning the Validity or Invalidity of Baptism. As to the Answers which he makes to the Arguments of St. Cyprian, and the other Bishops of his Opi∣nion, they are grounded for the most part upon the Comparison between concealed Hereticks and Evil Ministers, with known Hereticks and Schismaticks. For since the Baptism of the for∣mer is Valid and not to be renewed; why should not the same thing be said of the latter, since all the Reasons that are alledged for the nullity of the Baptism of Hereticks may also belong to Evil Ministers? It is said, for example, That to give the Holy Ghost one must have it; That Hereticks have it not; and consequently that they cannot give it. Why may we not reason after the same manner concerning Baptism conferred by concealed Hereticks, or by wicked Priests? Have they the Holy Ghost to give? Thus St. Augustin overthrows the Reasons and Testimonies brought in by St. Cyprian and his Collegues against the Validity of the Baptism of Hereticks, by shewing, That whil'st they prove too much, they prove nothing.

But his great Argument to destroy the Donatists, which he particularly insisteth upon in his last Book against Cresconius, is an Argument taken from their Conduct in a Schism that was risen up amongst themselves, betwixt Maximianus, upheld by some other Bishops of their Sect, and Primianus another Bishop of their Party at Carthage; They accused one another of several Crimes, and condemned one another; but Primianus's Party being the stronger, prevailed and held a Plenary Council at Bagais, wherein they condemned Maximianus, and his Adherents, in very reproachful terms, and got this Judgment to be confirmed by the Emperor's Letters. Now, according to the Donatists Principles, Persons thus Condemned were out of the Church; all that Communicated with them were out of the Church; all whom they baptized, were to be baptized again. And yet the Primianists behaved themselves quite otherwise; for they kept

Communion with some of the condemned Bishops, and owned them for lawful Bishops; they acknowledged those that were Baptized by the Maxim ianists, to be truly Baptized; and they admitted into their Communion those that were of the Maximianists Party. St. Au∣gustin compares this their Conduct, with their Behaviour towards the Scripture and the Uni∣versal Church; and by that Argument convinceth them, That it was only Prejudice and Ob∣stinacy which kept them in their Separation from the Chruch.

The Supplement that is added to this Ninth Volume, contains not only the Book against Fulgentius the Donatist, falsely attributed to St. Augustin, concerning which the Censure of the Louvain Doctors, and of Vindingus, set before it, may be consulted; but also Extracts from ancient Pieces concerning the History of the Donatists, taken out of Optatus, Eusebius, St. Augustin, the Conference at Carthage, the Councils of Carthage, and the Imperial Laws against the Donatists. And that all that St. Augustin writ against the Donatists might be published together, they copied out what he said in the Conference of Carthage. This Collection is the more useful, because there are considerable Restitutions of several Passages of Optatus, from a Manuscript in the Library at St. Germains des Prez. Here is one of the principal. There is a Passage in the First Book of Optatus, where it is said, That Eunomius and Olympius were sent into Africa to Ordain a Bishop, and to Degrade Caecilian and Optatus: Utremotis duobus unum ordinarent! This Passage obliged Albaspinaeus to affirm, That Donatus of Casae Nigrae had been Bishop of Carthage. He likewise draws from it great Advantages in favour of the Church of Rome: yet this Period is not in the St. Germains Copy, and it signifies nothing either for that which goes before, or for that which comes after. If we read the Passage, we may judge: Tunc duo Episcopi ad Africam missi sunt, Eunomius, & Olympius. Venerunt, & apud Carthagi∣nem fuerunt per dies quadraginta, vel quinquaginta, ut pronunciarent ubi esset Catholica. Hoc seditiosa pars Donati fieri passa non est. This Place is clear and plain: whereas, if this Period be inserted, Ut remotis duobus unum ordinarent, the sence is alter'd, and it will be contradictory. There is likewise, some Lines before, another Restitution, which is confirmed by St. Augustin's Testimony, in the Conference at Carthage. Donatus petiit, ut ei reverti licuisset, & nec ad Carthaginem accederet. Whereas they read before, Ut ei reverti Carthaginem contingeret. In the Extract out of the Third Book of Optatus, they distinguish Three Persecutions against the Donatists; and the Governors are named by whose Orders they were raised. This is not to be found in the ordinary Editions of Optatus. I shall not mention several other Corrections, which may make us wish that a new entire Edition of this Author were undertaken.

The TENTH TOME.

THE Tenth Volume, not yet Printed, is intended for the Books which St. Augustin composed * 1.169 against the Pelagians.

The Three Books Of Merits and Remission of Sins, wherein he treats of Infant-Baptism, di∣rected to Marcellinus, ought to be set in the first place; for till then he had not undertaken the Pelagians, except in his Sermons, or in Conversation, (as he takes notice in his Retractations.) He writ these in the Year 412. in Answer to the Pelagians Questions which Count Marcellinus had sent to him at Carthage. He speaks there particularly of Infant-Baptism, as necessary to remit Original Sin; and of the necessity of the Grace of Jesus Christ, which justifies us, or maketh us righteous; though whil'st we are in this Life, we cannot so perfectly accomplish God's Law, but that we are obliged to say in our daily Prayers, Forgive us our Sins. These are the principal Truths opposed by the Pelagians. St. Augustin refutes them without naming the Authors, and speaks of Pelagius in good Terms; because several Persons had a great Esteem for his Vertue: And he had not yet set forth his Doctrine in his own Name, being contented to propose it in other Mens Names, in his Commentaries upon St. Paul. St. Augustin, in the last Book, refutes the Explications which he had given of those Passages of the Apostle that speak of Original Sin.

Count Marcellinus having received these Three Books from St. Augustin, sent him word back again, That he had found a Passage which puzzl'd him; St. Augustin had said, That with the help of Grace, Man might live without Sin; though none was yet arrived to that Perfection in this Life, and that none would ever arrive to it. Marcellinus asked St. Augustin how he could affirm this to be possible, if there were no Examples of it. To satisfie him about that Question, St. Augustin wrote the Book Of the Spirit and of the Letter: Yet he doth not examine this Question to the bottom; but having answered in very few words, That God can do many things which he doth not, he boldly attacks those who durst affirm, That a Man may fulfil the Commandments, be Just and Vertuous, without the succour of Christ's Grace. He grounds these Reasonings upon that place of St. Paul, The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. By the Letter, he understandeth the Law and the Commandments, which are unprofitable without the help of Grace, which is the Spring of Faith, of Righteousness, Holiness, and all Christian Vertues. This Book is of the Year 413.

In the Year 414. two young Monks, Timasius and James, having been undeceived by St. Au∣gustin, as to the Pelagian Errors, sent to him one of Pelagius's Books; wherein he pleaded

for the Strength of Nature, to the Prejudice of Christ's Grace. St. Augustin immediately en∣gaged to write against it, and composed upon that Subject the Book Of Nature and of Grace: * 1.170 wherein he defends the Grace of Jesus Christ, without Prejudice to Nature, which is delivered and regulated by Grace. He explains in this Treatise his Principles concerning the Fall of Humane Nature, and the Necessity of Grace to be Justified; yet he spares Pelagius's Name.

But this Monk having afterwards discovered his Opinions, was cited by Heros, Bishop of Arles, and by Lazarus, Bishop of Aix, to a Council of Fourteen Bishops, held at Diospolis, in Palaestine, in the Year 415. wherein he was declared Catholick in the absence of his Accusers, having made a shew of condemning the Errors whereof he was accused. St. Augustin fearing lest Men should believe that the Council had approved his Doctrine, wrote a Book, entituled, Of the Acts of Pelagius: wherein he declares how Things were carried; and discovers at the same time, that Pelagius had imposed upon the Fathers of the Council, by professing a Doctrine which he had opposed in his Writings. This Book is of the Year 416, or 417. Pelagius made use of the same Artifice to persuade Albinus, Pinianus and Melania, that he did not maintain the Errors he was accused of, by Anathematizing them in appearance. Coelestius also deceived Pope Zosimus by the same Fraud, by presenting unto him a Counterfeit Catholick Confession. These Cheats St. Augustin discovers and refutes in the Treatise Of Christ's Grace, and in that Of Original Sin; wherein he shews that these Confessions of Faith are captious and deceitful. These Treatises are of the Beginning of the Year 418. It is probable also that it was at that same time that St. Augustin writ the small Treatise Of the Perfection of Righteousness, against Coelestius: where he Answers the Objections and Difficulties proposed by this Man, under the Name of, Definitions against the Opinion of the Catholicks, who affirmed, That there never was, nor ever should be a Man that could attain to that Perfection, of passing his whole Life without Offending God: St. Augustin maintains, That God does not grant this Grace even to the greatest Saints; and so that it is ridiculous to believe that Man can compass this by the sole strength of his Free-Will, as Pelagius and Coelestius imagined. He does not mention this Book in his Retractations, bu•• St. Prosper quotes it several times.

The First Book Of Marriage and Concupiscence, was composed about the latter end of the Year 418. There St. Augustin Answereth one of the most malicious of the Pelagian Objections against Original Sin. If Concupiscence (said they) is Evil, and an Effect of Sin; if all Chil∣dren are Born in Sin, how comes Matrimony to be approved, which is the Effect and Spring of this Sin? St. Augustin handleth this nice Question very cunningly, by shewing, That though Lust be a Defect, and a Consequence of the First Man's Sin, which remaineth even in the Baptized; yet Conjugal Chastity is to be approved, which makes a good use of an evil thing. He occasionally discourseth of several Questions about Marriage, which he had treated of in other Books. This Book is dedicated to Count Valerius, into whose hands the Letter that contained this Objection fell.

Julianus, an Italian Bishop, a Man of VVit, having read this Book, he was resolved to sig∣nalize himself, by writing Four Books against this Treatise of St. Augustin. This Father having seen some Extracts of them, that were directed to Valerius, Answered them in the Second Book Of Marriages and Concupiscence, written in 419.

Some time after, he received the Four whole Books of Julianus. In reading of them, he perceived that the Extracts sent to him were not very faithfully drawn; which determined him to undertake another VVork to Answer them fully. It is divided into Six Books. In the two first he opposes the Testimonies of the Holy Fathers who dy'd in the Communion of the Church, to Julianus's Calumnies, who had accused St. Augustin of Approving the Manichaean Doctrine; because he had taught, That all Men inherited Original Sin from Adam; which is remitted not only in those of riper Years, but even in Children, by the Grace of Baptism. And for this he alledgeth some Passages out of St. Irenaeus, St. Cyprian, Rheticius Bishop of Autun, Olympius a Bishop in Spain, St. Hilary of Poictiers, and St. Ambrose, which prove, That Man is Born in Sin, and is Cleansed by Baptism. But because Julianus appealed to the Greek Fathers. St. Augustin produceth likewise the Testimonies of St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Basil, together with the Judgment of the Bishops of Palaestine, who condemned Pelagius. He Answereth a Passage of St. Chrysostom which Julianus had cited, and quotes several other Pas∣sages out of this Father, which suppose Original Sin. Having thus strengthned his Opinion with these Great Mens Authority, he likewise recriminates upon Julianus for publishing such Principles as favoured of the Heresie of the Manichees; and with this he concludes the First Book.

In the Second Book, he refuteth the chief Arguments of the Pelagians, against original Sin, by the Authorities of the Fathers; showing, That in their Writings they prevented and resolved those very Objections, which the Pelagians did so much depend upon. Having colle∣cted a great Number of Passages upon that subject, he saith, That their Authority is so much the more considerable, because they had said these Things without prejudice, before the Pelagi∣an Heresie broke out, following therein the Sence of the Church.

We have shewed, saith he, directing his Speech to the Pelagians, by invincible Authorities, That the Holy Bishops, who lived before us, taught the same Faith which we maintain, and overthrew the Argu∣ments which you make use of, not only in their Discourses, but in their Writings also—We have shewed you their Opinions, which are very particular, and clear: It is not their Power, but God's who made them his Holy Temples, which you ought to Fear. They

judged our Cause, at a time, when they could not be suspected either of favouring, or hating either Party; they had neither relation to, nor affection for the one, or the other; they were angry neither with you, nor us; neither you, nor we, could move them to Pity. They pre∣served the Doctrine which they found in the Church, and they taught what they had Lear∣ned: They delivered to their Children what they received of their Fathers. We had not yet referred our Cause to them, and yet they gave judgment on our side; neither of us were known to them, and yet they pronounced in our behalf; we had not had any Dispute with you, and they declared the Right to be on our side.▪ Those Bishops were Learned, Just, and Wise; they strongly defended the Truth against Innovations; and none can say, that they wanted Wit, Knowledge, or Freedom. Should a Council be assembled from all Parts of the World, it were hard to find such a Number of Bishops of that importance; nei∣ther did they all live at the same time. They are the choice of the greatest Men whom God gave to his Church in several Ages. Their Testimonies are collected in a Book, which may come to your Hands. The more you should wish to have them for your Judges, if you de∣fended the Faith of the Church, the more ought you to fear them when you oppose it. I hope that their Testimonies will cure your Blindness, as I wish it; but if you continue obsti∣nate in your Error, which God forbid, you are no more to look for a tribunal to justifie you, but those wonderful Defenders of the Truth to accuse you, St. Irenaeus, St. Cyprian, Rheti∣cius, Olympius, St. Hilary, St. Gregory, St. Ambrose, St. Basil, St. John Chrysostom, St. Innocent, and St. Jerom, with all those that communicated with them, that is to say the whole Church. If you run to that excess of Folly, you must be answered by defending the Faith of these great Men, as the Gospel it self is defended against ungodly Men, and the Enemies of Reli∣gion.

This he doth in the Four next Books, which contain the Answer to Julianus his Four Books. There he treateth particularly of original Sin, of Concupiscence, of the fal∣shood of the Vertues of the Heathens, of the necessity of Baptism, and of Grace; and answe∣reth all that Julianus had said against what he had set down in his Book of Matrimony, and Concupiscence. I do not believe that these Books were finished before the Year 424.

Before he had written them, Pope Boniface sent him two Letters of the Pelagians: the one of Julianus written to Boniface himself; and the other, in the Name of Eighteen Bishops of the same Opinion which had been sent to Thessalonica. St. Augustin having received them, immediately wrote four Books to refute them, which he directed to Pope Boniface. In the be∣ginning of the First, to get that Pope's good Will, he thanks him for the Love which he shewed towards him, and for the courteous manner wherewith he received his Brother Alypius of Ta∣gasta; he complements him upon the Dignity of his See, and tells him, That tho' all Bishops are obliged to watch for the Defence of Christ's Flock, he was yet more particularly engaged to do it, because he was in a more Eminent Place. Afterwards he answers Julianus's Calum∣nies, and proves, that the Catholicks did not deny Free-Will; that they do not condemn Mar∣riage, nor the lawful Procreation of Children; that they do not condemn the Saints of the old Testament, neither do they say, That the Apostles were defiled through disorderly Desires, and explains in what Sence St. Paul said he was carnal. But they maintain, That Man cannot be Righteous without Grace; that Children are born in Sin; that the involuntary Motions of Concupiscence, are an Effect of Sin; that the Grace of Jesus Christ doth not only help Man to do Good when he is willing, but makes him willing to do it; that the Saints of the Old Testament, were only justified by Faith in Jesus Christ; that Baptism is not only necessary to Children, to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, but also to obtain a share in Life eternal, out of which they are excluded by original Sin alone.

In the Two next Books, he refutes almost the same Calumnies contained in the other Letter of the Pelagians: The Two First are about Free-Will, and Marriage. St. Augustin adds nothing to what he had said in the fore-going Book. In the Third, they taxed the Catholicks with introducing Fatality. St. Augustin shews the difference betwixt Grace and Fate. In the Fourth, they accused them of maintaining, That the Law was not given to Justifie Man, but to render him more Sinful. St. Augustin tells them, That they did not understand the Opinion of the Church, in that Point; that the Law was given to teach what ought to be done, but that it is Grace which makes us obey the Law; and so the Law doth indeed shew what Righte∣ousness is, but doth not make us practise it. Fifthly, They upbraided the Catholicks with be∣lieving, That Baptism did not remit all Sins; so that Men continued partly God's Children, and partly the Children of the Devil. St. Augustin replies, That Baptism doth indeed remit all Sins, but it doth not cure Nature of its Weaknesses, and Imperfections▪ That the Righ∣teous may, and do Sin often, without becoming therefore the Children of the Devil, because there is no Man so Righteous as that he sinneth not. The Sixth Calumny is concerning the Old Testament. St. Augustin answereth, That the Righteous who lived under the Old Testament, were justified through the Grace of the New; whereof the Old was only the Fi∣gure. The Seventh is, that the Apostles, and Prophets were not perfectly Holy, but only less criminal than others. St. Augustin answers, That they were truly Righteous through Faith, and Charity, but they had not all the perfection of Vertue, which now they have in the other Life. He utterly rejects the Ninth Calumny, whereby they accused the Catholicks of saying, That Jesus Christ had been subject to Sin. The Tenth Calumny was expressed in these Terms: They affirm, That Men shall begin in the next Life, to practise the Commandments, which

they did not practise in this. St. Augustin opposes it; shewing, That they put an ill Constru∣ction upon a Catholick Truth; which is, That the Vertue, and the Righteousness of Men, shall only be perfect in the next Life.

In the last Book, St. Augustin refutes the Pelagian Doctrines; and shews, That under pre∣tence of commending Nature, Marriage, Free-VVill, the Law, and the Saints of the Old Te∣stament, they advanced very dangerous Errors, to which he opposes several Testimonies of St. Cyprian, and of St. Ambrose.

The Book of Grace, and Free-Will, was written by St. Augustin in the Year 427. upon a Dispute which happened in the Monastery of Adrumetum, against those who fearing, least by the Doctrine of Grace, Free-VVill should be denied, do indeed deny Grace by defending Free-VVill, because they suppose that Grace is given according to Merit. This last Error St. Augustin chiefly opposes in this Book; shewing, That the beginning both of Faith, and good Resoluti∣ons, is an effect of Grace.

The reading of this Book did not settle Peace among those Monks: For there was an Objecti∣on proposed, which was obvious enough to every Man's understanding. If no Man can do Good, without the Grace of God, and this Grace cannot be merited, no Man is to be repro∣ved, or corrected for not doing his Duty, since it is not in his Power to do it, because he wants Grace, and cannot deserve it. St. Augustin perceiving the Difficulty of this Objection, for the Solution thereof, composed the Book of Correction, and Grace, wherein, without re∣tracting any thing of what he had formerly said, he affirms, That Admonition is to be used: 1. Because it may happen, that God will touch the Heart of him that is reproved. 2. Because Sinners sin voluntarily, and without Compulsion; and that they cannot complain that God hath denied them his Grace, or the Gift of Perseverance, since he owes his Grace to no body. He does not content himself with Answering the Objection; but further explains and confirms his Principles, by shewing the difference betwixt the Grace of Adam in the State of Innocence, and that which is necessary to Man in the state of fallen Nature. He speaks also of the Gift of Perseverance, which is not granted unto all; and of the Power of Grace, and the free Predesti∣nation of the Elect.

He again insisteth upon the same Matter, and upon the same Principles, in both the Books which he writ in answer to Hilary's, and Prosper's Letters. The First is of the Predestination of the Saints, and the Second of the Gift of Perseverance: Wherein he demonstrates, That the beginning of Faith, and good Purposes, is the Gift of God; and that so, our Predestina∣tion, or Vocation, does not depend upon our Merits. The Second Book concerns the Gift of Perseverance, which he shews to depend equally upon God, as the beginning of our Conversion. St. Augustin composed these Treatises in the Year 429.

St. Augustin's last Effort against the Pelagians, fell upon Julianus his old Adversary; who, to maintain the Quarrel he had begun, composed Eight Books against St. Augustin's Second Book Of Matrimony, and Concupiscence. St. Augustin having received Five of them from Aly∣pius, undertook to write against them, and was engaged about the Fourth, when he writ the ••••4th. Letter to Quodvultdeus, in the Year 428. It is probable, that Alypius sent him the other Three, but St. Augustin answered but Six; and this Work remains imperfect, as Possi∣dius affirms. The Six Books of St. Augustin were published by F. Vignier, from a Manuscript of the Abby of Clervaux, which, in all probability, will be revised and corrected in a new Edition from some other Manuscripts. These Books are written by way of Dialogue: There St. Augustin produces Julianus's own Terms, and Answers them plainly, and in few Words.

We referr'd to speak of St. Augustin's Four Treatises Of the original of the Soul, to this place, because they were not written properly against the Pelagians, though St. Augustin handleth there some Questions that have some relation to the Dispute betwixt them: Therefore I think that it had been more proper to have set them at the end of the Sixth Volume, than in this place. The occasion and subject of these Four Books is this.

A Priest of the Province of Mauritania Caesariensis, one Victor, who was Surnamed Vincen∣tius, from a Donatist Bishop, Successor to Victor of that Name, whose Memory that Priest who had been a Donatist, did reverence very much: This Priest, I say, having met in the House of one Peter, a Spanish Priest, with a Writing of St. Augustin's, wherein this Saint had set down his usual Doubts about the Soul's Original, wrote two Books against him, which he directed to Peter himself. He affirmed in that Book, That nothing was easier than the decision of that Question, and that he was sure that God did every moment create new Souls; but added to this Principle several erroneous Consequences: He confessed, indeed, That the Soul was no part of God's Substance; but he would not say that he created it of nothing; He asserted, That it had a Body, and so that Man was made up of a gross Body, of a Soul that was a more sub∣til Body, and of a Spirit. He said, That the Soul deserved to be placed in the Body, to contract some Pollution by conversing with Flesh; but that it was also Purified by the Flesh. That those Children whom God predestinated to Baptism, were saved though they were not baptized; That their Souls went into Paradise until the Day of Judgment, and that after the Resurrection they should enter into the Kingdom of Heaven: That Sacrifices were to be offered for them: And last of all, That the reason why some were Saved and others Damned, was the know∣ledge which God had of the Good or Evil which they should have done, if they had lived. These

Notions being very dangerous, and Vincentius having maintained them with a great deal of Wit and Eloquence; when St. Augustin had received these Books from Renatus, a Monk of Caesarea, he thought himself obliged to Answer them.

He wrote therefore a Treatise to this Renatus, who had sent them; wherein he refuteth the particular Opinions before-named: and among the rest, That of Childrens Salvation who die without Baptism; He showeth, That they cannot be saved but by that Sacrament; and that the Eucharist is not to be offered for those that died before the Use of Reason, and unbaptized: For, saith he, The Body of Jesus Christ is not to be offered but for such as are Members of Jesus Christ; But none can be a Member of Jesus Christ, but by Baptism in Jesus Christ; or by dying for Jesus Christ;

Nisi Baptismate in Christo, aut morte pro Christo.

He answereth the Example of the good Thief, in whom Faith supply'd Baptism; and that of Dinocrates Brother to St. Per∣petua, a Child of Seven Years of Age, to whom God granted Salvation, through the Prayers of that Saint, as it is related in the Acts of her Martyrdom. As to this latter Example, St. Augustin saith at first, That being not taken out of a Canonical Book, he can ground no Doctrine upon it, and that it is uncertain whether that Child was baptized or no.

After this, he answers Vincentius's Notion, That Children were either Saved or Damned, for the Good or Evil which they would have done, if they had lived; This, he says, is a foolish Opinion: For, how can a Person be punished or recompensed, for Evil or Good Actions which are not, and which shall never be? were this true, no Man that is baptized can be secure; for who knows whether he should not have Apostatiz'd, had he lived? And how can this be made to agree with what the Scripture saith of a Man that is taken away, lest the Wickedness of his Sin should corrupt him. Having refuted Vincentius's false Consequences, he shews, That those Passages of Scripture which he alledgeth to prove the daily Creation of Souls, do indeed prove nothing, and that he takes almost all of them in a wrong sence; yet he condemns not this Opi∣nion, provided that Testimonies of Scripture be not abused to prove it, and that nothing be al∣ledged contrary to the Doctrine of the Church to uphold it: provided likewise that it be not said, 1. That God created sinful Souls. 2. That Children dying before Baptism, are saved. 3. That Souls sinned before their entrance into Bodies. 4. That they are punished for future Sins that shall never be.

St. Augustin was not contented to write this Book to Renatus; but he writ besides, a second Trea∣tise upon the same Subject, to Peter the Spanish Priest, who had given the occasion of this Con∣troversie, to disabuse him concerning Vincentius's Opinions.

And last of all, he dedicates two Books to Vincentius himself. In the first, he refuteth these Errors, which he reduces to these Eleven Propositions: 1. That the Soul is not created of No∣thing. 2. That God creates Souls in infinitum. 3. That the Soul loses its Merit by being uni∣ted with the Body. 4. That it is renewed by the same Flesh, which caused it to lose its Merit. 5. That it deserved to be sinful, before it entred into the Body. 6. That original Sin is remit∣ted in Children that die without Baptism. 7. That some Children whom God hath predesti∣nated to be baptized, do not receive that Sacrament. 8. That one may say of them, He was taken away, lest Wickedness should corrupt him. 9. That there are Habitations for them in the Kingdom of Heaven. 10. That the Eucharist ought to be offered for them. 11. That their Souls go into Paradise after Death; and that after the Resurrection they shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.

In the Second, St. Augustin defends those things which Vincentius found fault with in his Book: They are Three. 1. His Doubts of the Original of the Soul. 2. His denying it to be a Body. 3. That he distinguished not the Soul from the Spirit. He said, touching the first Point, Is it credible that a Man does not know himself? if that be, Wherein doth he differ from Beasts? St. Augustin answers, That Man ought to confess his Ignorance, not only as to what relates to the Divinity, but also as to many things that concern his Body and Soul: And he pro∣duces several Examples of them. Upon the Second, his Question was, What the Soul is, if it be not a Body? but as he confessed at the same time that God is not a Body; St. Augustin asketh him the same Questions concerning the Nature of God, which he had started about the Nature of the Soul. He refuteth their Opinion who believed the Soul to be Corporeal, and particularly Vincentius's fancy, That the Soul being entred into the Body, was diffused into all the Parts, and by a kind of Congelation, had received the figure thereof. He answers the Argument which Vincentius had raised out of the Parable of Dives and Lazarus, and from Apparitions; observing, That the Soul feels and represents Bodies, though it be not a Body, and though there be no Body present. As for what is said of Lazarus's Finger, and of the parts of a Soul; he retorts the Argument upon Vincentius, because he spake likewise of the Finger of God, and Scripture ascribes Members to him, though he be a meer Spirit.

At last, St. Augustin saith to the last Point, That when the Spirit is distinguish'd from the Soul, the word Spirit is taken in a special manner for Intelligence or Understanding; but not for Spirit, as it is a Nature opposed to Body. Lastly, He exhorteth Victor to lay aside the Sur-name of Vincentius; because, being entred into the Church, he could no longer, without con∣demning himself, look upon Vincentius as a Saint, who died a Donatist. These Treatises were composed in 419.

Though the main Points treated of in St. Augustin's Works against the Pelagians have been mentioned already: yea, it will not be amiss, to give here a general view of his Doctrine. God

created the First Man in a state of Innocence, Holiness, and Grace. He was subject neither to the Necessity of Dying, nor to Sicknesses, nor Pain, nor the Motions of Lust, nor Ignorance, nor any of the Inconveniencies of Life, or the Imperfections of Nature, which are the Consequences and Effect of his Sin. His Free-Will was entire, and weakened with nothing. It was perfectly indifferent to do either Good or Evil, though it could not do good without the help of Grace; but this Grace which God afforded him, was entirely subjected to his Free-Will: It was a help without which he could not do good; but it did not make him do good. Such was the Condi∣tion of the First Man, like that of the Angels before their Sin. Such would have been the Con∣dition of his Posterity, had he continued in that Happy state; but having offended God by his Disobedience, he, and all his Posterity are become subject unto Death, Pain, Sicknesses, Punish∣ments; and what is worse, to Ignorance and Lust, that is to say, to Extravagant Motions which are within us, whether we will, or no. But what is yet more incomprehensible, all his Descen∣dents begotten in the ordinary way, are born in Sin; They all contract the Sin which we call Original, which makes Children the Objects of God's Wrath, and infallibly Damns them, except they are regenerated by Baptism. Baptism doth indeed take away the stain of Sin, but it doth not remove the Punishment, and the Consequences of Sin. Concupiscence, Ignorance, Inclination to Sin, Weaknesses, and other Punishments for Sin, abide still during the whole course of this Mortal Life. Free-Will is not extinguish'd, but it hath not so much strength, and stands in need of powerful assistance to do good. The Grace which it needs to act, is not only that help without which it could neither will nor do that which is good; but also such an assistance as makes it both will and do it infallibly: This Grace is necessary not barely to ac∣complish entirely what is good, and to continue therein; but it is even necessary to begin Faith, for Prayer, and for the first Motions of Conversion. Yet it bereaves us not of our liberty, be∣cause we do not keep the Commandments, but as far as we are willing. It worketh this Will in us, without Violence or Compulsion: for God constraineth no Man to do either good or evil; but to do good the Will must be succoured by Grace, which doth not deprive it of its Liberty: and this Grace is not granted to Merit, but is absolutely free. Since the First Man's Sin, the whole mass of Mankind was corrupt, condemned, and subject to Death. God by free Grace and Mercy takes out of this mass of Corruption whom he pleases, leaving the rest in that condition, out of that Justice which none can find fault with; for what is Man that he should dispute it with God? Doth the Earthen Vessel say to the Potter that framed it, Why hast thou made me thus? However, it may be truly said, That all Men may be saved if they will; if they be not, they can only accuse their own perverse Will, whereby they resist the Call of God. There are some Graces which he refuseth not to Reprobates, wherewith they might do good if they would. To some, he gives the Knowledge of his Law, and they despise it; He inspires into others a desire of being Converted, and they reject it; Some he excites to Prayer, but they neglect to do it; He speaks to the Hearts of several, who harden themselves, that they may not hearken unto his Voice; He overcomes the hardness of some for a time, converting them by an Effectual Grace, who plunge themselves again in Vice. In a word, how strong and powerful soever the Grace is which he gives, yet it may be said in some sence, that Man may always resist it, though he doth not actually do it. God does not grant this Grace to all Men, not only because he oweth it to none; but also because some make themselves unworthy of it: for to say nothing of Children who die before the use of Reason, who are either damned because of Original Sin, or saved by the Grace of Baptism, the Adult who have not the gift of Perse∣verance, have made themselves unworthy of it, either through their own Sins, or by the Con∣tempt which they have cast upon God's Vocation; or by the Opposition they have made to in∣ward Grace; or lastly, by falling again into the state of Sin, from which God delivered them in his Mercy. And so no Man can either excuse himself or accuse the Justice of God, because every one receiveth what he deserved; every one is rewarded or punished, according to the good or the evil which he hath done, by his Will which co-operates with the most effectual Grace.

The Effect of this Grace, according to St. Augustin, is to make us in love with that which is good; it is a pleasure which draws our heart towards good things, and enables us to keep the Commandments; without this Grace, there is no Action meritorious. The fear of Punishment, though merely servile, is good and profitable, because it regulates the inward Man, but it does not render us Righteous before God. We shall never perfectly accomplish the Precept of loving God in this Life, because we shall never love him so perfectly as in the next: And though through God's Grace, a Man may absolutely avoid all Sin in this Life; yet it never did, nor shall ever happen that a mere Man (excepting the Blessed Virgin, of whom St. Augustin would not have us to speak, when Sin is mentioned) passed through this Life without Sin: For this reason, the most righteous say daily, Lord remit us our Debts; that is, our Sins; But these are not mortal Sins, which bereave the Soul of Righteousness and Holiness; they are venial and daily Sins, which are indeed against God's Law, but do not utterly destroy Charity.

St. Augustin's Principles concerning Predestination and Reprobation, do exactly agree with his Opinion touching Grace. Both those Decrees, according to him, suppose the fore-knowledge of Original Sin, and of the Corruption of the whole mass of Mankind. If God would suffer all Men to remain there, none could complain of that severity, seeing they are all guilty and doom'd to Damnation, because of the Sin of the First Man. But God resolved from all Eter∣nity,

to deliver some whom he had chosen out of pure Mercy, without any regard to their future Merits; and from all Eternity he prepared for them that were thus chosen, those Gifts and Graces which are necessary, to save them infallibly; and these he bestows upon them in time. All those therefore, that are of the number of the Elect, hear the Gospel and believe, and persevere in the Faith working out by Love, to the end of their lives. If they chance to wander from the right way, they return, and repent of their Sins: and it is certain that they shall all die in the Grace of Jesus Christ.

Reprobation is not like Predestination; God doth not positively cast away any Man; he pre∣destinateth none to Damnation; he only knows those that are left in that mass of Perdition, and are not of the happy number of those whom he will deliver through Mercy. These Wretches are at last Condemned, either because of Original Sin which is not remitted to them, and such are the Children that die without receiving Baptism, or for the Sins which by their Free-Will they have added to the first Sin; or, because they wanted Faith and Righteousness; or lastly, because they did not persevere unto the end.

This is an Abridgment of St. Augustin's Doctrine, which is set down in his Books against the Pelagians, and in several other places of his Works.

The Supplement to this Volume, containeth for the most part Writings that serve to justifie St. Augustin's Doctrine of Predestination and of Grace, and some other Treatises upon the same Subject, attributed to St. Augustin; the Authors whereof are not well known. St. Prospers Four Books, in Defence of St. Augustin, are of the first sort; to which they have added his Epi∣gram, in Commendation of the same Father.

Coelestine's Letter, the Capitulars that follow it, and the Canons of the Council of Orange, are likewise Illustrious Approbations of St. Augustin's Doctrine. Here one might add several other Treatises about Grace, written upon occasion of those Contests raised concerning St. Au∣gustin's Opinion; such as the Letter of the African Bishops that were banished into Sardinia; The Canons of the Council of Valentia; with the Treatises of Florus, Lupus, Remigius of Auxerre, Ratramnus, and several other Authors who writ of these Matters in the Ninth Century.

The other VVorks contained in this Addition do not bear the Names of any Authors. The First is a considerable Treatise, divided into Six Books, and entituled, Hypognosticôn; Or, Re∣flections and Notes against the Pelagians and Coelestians. The Author sets down the main Doctrines of the Pelagians in their own words, and then confutes them Although this Book is conformable to St. Augustin's Doctrine, yet it hath not his Style. That Father among the Bene∣dictines, who chiefly looks after the New Edition of St. Augustin, having given me notice, That he thought it might be Marius Mercator's; I have examined it, and found that his Conjecture is not ill grounded. For, in the First place, That VVork is of an ancient Author, who both liv'd and writ at the same time with Pelagius and Coelestius, and he was of St. Augustin's Opinion; this agrees with Marius Mercator. 2. Marius Mercator usually gives his Treatises the same Title with this; for so he entituled his Writing against Julianus. 3. The Form of this Treatise is perfectly like that of his other Treatises: he lays down there the very Terms of his Adversaries, and then refutes them with Notes and Reflections. 4. Having compared this Treatise with others of Marius Mercator, and particularly with his Book against Julianus, I found the Style to be the same: One may meet with the same Terms repeated again, the same Figures, the same Liveliness, the same Turn, and the same Expressions. Lastly, St. Augustin, in the 193d. Letter, to Marius Mercator, in 418. affirms, That this Man had written a Book full of Scripture-Testimonies against the new Hereticks: and this can belong to no other of Mercator's Treatises, but agrees perfectly with this. These are the Conjectures which I thought of, and I doubt not but the Benedictines will bring several others much stronger; in the mean time, these may be sufficient to make their Conjecture very probable.

The Book Of Predestination and Grace, which is among St. Augustin's Works, under the Name of an incertain and suspicious Author, is attributed by Sirmondus to St. Fulgentius, and Printed under his Name among this Father's Works. We shall examine whether it be his, when we come to St. Fulgentius. However, this small Discourse of Predestination agrees neither with the Style nor with the Doctrine of St. Augustin.

These are all this Father's Works. His Life will be added in another Volume, with the Testimonies of the Ancients concerning him, the Commendations that have been given him, and very large and useful Tables.

Though we have given a sufficient Account both of St. Augustin's Character and Genius, in speaking of his Works; yet it is convenient to say something of them here in general. He was a Man of great Extent, great Exactness, and great force of Mind. His Reasonings were very strong. His ordinary Method is, to lay down extensive Principles, from which he draws an infinite number of Consequences: so that all the Points of his Doctrine have a great Connexion one with another. He argued more upon most of the Mysteries of our Religion, than any Author before him. He starts several Questions never thought of before, and resolves many of them by the mere Strength of his VVit. He often left the Notions of his Predecessors, to follow a Path wholly new, whether in Expounding the Scriptures, or in Opinions of Divinity. That may be said of him, as to Divinity, what Cicero said of himself, as to Philosophy, That he was Magnus Opiniator; that is, that he advanced several Opinions that were only pro∣bable.

But St. Augustin doth it modestly, and with much Prudence, without pretending to oblige others to embrace his Opinions without Examination: whereas, when the Question is about the Doctrine of the Church, he proposes and maintains it stoutly, and as strongly opposes its Opposers. He had much less Learning than VVit; for he understood not the Languages, neither had he read the Ancients much. He wrote with greater Facility and Clearness, than Politeness and Elegancy. Though he had taught Rhetorick, yet either he was not Master of the Eloquence of the Orators, or he neglected it: nay, his Expressions are not always pure; for he often uses unproper and barbarous Words. He often uses little strokes of VVit, and plays with VVords. He repeats the same things, and insists upon the same Arguments in hun∣dreds of places. He dwells long upon the same Thought; to which he gives several turns, and enlarges frequently upon common places. He treated of infinite numbers of Things, by laying down Principles; and framed (if we may so say) the Body of Divinity for all the Latin Fathers that came after him. They have not only taken out of his Books the Principles they make use of, but often they have only copied them. The Councils have borrowed his VVords to express their Decisions. In short, Peter Lombard, in the Twelfth Century, going about to compose an Epitome of the whole Body of Divinity, did little else but Collect Passages out of St. Augustin. And though Thomas Aquinas, and other Schoolmen, followed another Me∣thod; yet, for the most part, they have stuck to S. Augustin's Principles, whereupon they erected their Theological Opinions.

After this, no Man needs wonder that his VVorks were so much looked after formerly, and so many times published since Printing was invented. The Edition of St. Augustin's VVorks was one of the first considerable Things that Printers committed to the Press. Amerbachius undertook it in 1495. This Gothick Edition was followed by that of Basil, in Nine Volumes, in the Year 1506. and by that of Paris, in 1515. with long Lines, published in 1528. and in 1526. which is the fairest for its Character. The Editions of Guillard and Chevallon, which came out not long after, are likewise pretty fair ones.

In 1571. Two came out; the one in Paris, by Morellus; and the other at Lions: The Doctors of Louvain having carefully Revised St. Augustin's VVorks, caused them to be Printed at Antwerp, in 1577. The following Editions are only new Impressions of this. The first and the fairest was done at Paris, 1586. and was followed by those of the Years 1609, 1614, 1626, 1635, 1652. not to mention that at Venice in 1584. that at Colen, in 1616. and the last Edi∣tion at Lions. Now they having Printed, from time to time, several Treatises of St. Augustin that were not in the former Editions, Father Vignier thought fit to collect them into a Body, that might serve for a Supplement to all the Editions of St. Augustin. He joyned to it the im∣perfect Treatise against Julianus, and some Sermons which had not been Printed before, and published them all in Two Volumes, in Folio, at Paris, in 1655. This Labour becomes useless by the last Edition of St. Augustin, which excelleth and effaces all the fore-going Editions.

ZOSIMUS.

POpe Innocent I. dying the 12th. of March, 417. Zosimus was promoted into his Place upon the 18th. of the same Month. Though he sat but One Year, Nine Months, and some * 1.171 Days in the Roman See, yet he very much exerted his Authority in the Disputes which he had with the Bishops both of Africa and Gaul. This appears by his Letters, which we are now to discourse of according to the Order wherein they ought to be placed. To understand those which concern Africa, we are to know, That Coelestius, Pelagius's Disciple, having been con∣demned in the Council of Carthage, assembled in 412. thought it convenient to appeal to the Pope, contrary to the Order and Custom of that Time. The Africans did not much trouble themselves about that Appeal; neither did he much value it himself; for without taking it out, he went to Ephesus, where he found means to be Ordained Priest. Some Years after he came to Constantinople; from whence he was Expelled by Atticus, who discovered his Error, and writ against him to Thessalonica, to Carthage, and into Asia. That happened at the same time that Zosimus was raise to the Popedom. Coelestius being informed of it, came imme∣diately to Rome, to prepossess this new Pope, and to ingratiate himself with him, by making him a Judge in his Cause. And indeed, Zosimus finding this a fit Opportunity to promote his Design of Encreasing his Authority, and drawing to himself the Appeals of Causes judged in other places, he failed not to hearken to Coelestius, and to admit him to justifie himself. He left all other Businesses, to stick particularly to this. He made Coelestius appear in St. Cle∣ment's Church; examined the Heads of the Accusation that was formed against him. He caused him to make a Confession of Faith, whereby he disowned the Errors which Heros and Lazarus had laid to his Charge. He enquired after the Qualifications of those Accusers; whom he found (as he saith) to have been wrongfully Ordained, Expelled out of their Bishop-ricks, and separated from the Communion of the rest. Zosimus, though much prepossess'd in

Coelestius's behalf, yet durst not give Judgment in his Case without writing to the African Bi∣shops; but he did it after such manner as sufficiently discovered how much he favoured him: For after he had writ all this that we have said, he declares, That if Coelestius's Accusers came not to Rome within Two Months, to Convict him of maintaining other Opinions than those which he then professed, he should take it for granted that he was Innocent. At the latter end, he declares all these Questions to be only vain Subtilties, and unprofitable Contests, which rather destroy than edifie; and are Effects of an imprudent Curiosity, and of too great an itch of Speaking and Writing. This Letter was written about July, in the Year 417.

After the writing of this Letter, Zosimus received one from Prailus, Bishop of Jerusalem, in Coelestius's behalf, with Pelagius's Confession of Faith. This News, the Absence of the Accusers, and the Silence of the Africans, who returned no Answer to his Letter, confirmed him in the Judgment which he had made of Coelestius's Doctrine. He deals with their Accu∣sers, as with most unworthy Persons. He upbraids Lazarus, as one that made it his practice to accuse the Innocent; and as one that had been condemned by Proculus, Bishop of Marseilles, in a Synod at Turin, for having falsely and calumniously accused Britius, Bishop of Tours. He adds, That having been Ordained Bishop of Aix, some time after, by the Favour of Constantine the Tyrant, he retained the Shadow of the Priesthood so long as the Power of that Tyrant lasted. As for Heros, he reproacheth him for following the same Party, and for doing Violence. Afterwards, he tells the African Bishops, That they were to blame, in being so easily persuaded upon the Word of those Accusers; and makes no scruple of declaring Pelagius and Coelestius Innocent, seeing their Accusers had not appeared.

Zosimus's First Letter was carried by Basiliscus, a Subdeacon, who cited Paulinus to the Pope's Tribunal; but he did not concern himself to appear: And the African Bishops were not at all moved by Zosimus's Pretension; on the contrary, they stood by the Judgment which they had given firmly; which also had been confirmed by his Predecessor. They told him plainly, That this Cause being born in Africa, and judged there, Coelestius could not Appeal, nor he take Cognizance of it. Lastly, They made a Protestation, to prevent Zosimus pro∣nouncing Judgment by default in the behalf of Coelestius and Pelagius: Yea, they went fur∣ther, for without waiting for the Pope's Judgment, they confirmed what they had done, and condemned the Doctrine of Pelagius and Coelestius a-new. Having taken this Precaution, they writ again to Zosimus, and sent him all the Acts of what had been done in Africa against Coelestius: shewing him at the same time, That it was not enough to oblige Pelagius and Coele∣stius to approve in general what was in Pope Innocent's Letter, but that they ought to be made to acknowledge particularly all the Catholick Truths that were contrary to their Errors.

Zosimus having received these Letters, with the Advertisements of the Africans who had likewise written to Court about the business, durst not go any further, and was contented to assert his Authority, by writing to them, That though he had power to judge all Causes, and none had any right to reform his Judgments, yet he would do nothing without communi∣cating it unto them: That he was surprized, that they should write to him as if they had been persuaded that he had given credit to all that Coelestius had said to him: That he had not proceeded so fast; because too much Deliberation cannot be used, when a Supreme Judg∣ment is to be pronounced: and, That after the first Letter which he received from them, he left all in the same Condition that it was before. This Letter, of the 19th. of March, 418. is the Tenth in the usual Order of Zosimus's Letters.

It appears by this, that the Pope began to alter his Mind, concerning Coelestius, and to mistrust his Sincerity. But he was fully convinced of his Double-dealing, when the time of Judgment came: for having caused him to be cited to come and condemn the Six Articles that were laid to his Charge clearly, if he would be absolved of the Judgment that was given against him in Africa, he not only refused to appear, but fled from Rome. Zosimus, provoked to see himself deceived, wrote to all the Bishops a long Letter, wherein he condemned Coelestius's Articles, and Pelagius's Writings. This Letter is not all extant, but only some Fragments of it produced by St. Augustin and Marius Mercator. It was very long, and contained the whole History of this Affair. He gave this Judgment after April, in the Year 418.

Zosimus had likewise some Contests with the Bishops of Gaul. The Churches of Arles and Vienna had long disputed the Right of Primacy, over the Provinces of Gallia Narbonensis, and Viennensis. This Contest had been laid a-sleep for some time by a Decree of the Council at Turin, which ordained, That in Expectation of an absolute Decision of that Quarrel, both Churches should enjoy the Right of Metropolis over the Churches that were near to each of them. But Zosimus was no sooner promoted to the Popedom, but he declares for Patroclus, Bishop of Arles; and granted him by his Letter all that he could wish for: For he gave him, in the first place, the Right of giving Formed Letters to all the Ecclesiasticks of Gaul that would come to Rome; forbidding absolutely that any should go out of Gaul without that sort of Let∣ters from him, whereby it appeared what they were, and whence they came. This Privilege did belong to the Church of Arles; as indeed Zosimus saith, That he granted it not to Patroclus, because of his Church, but for his Deserts. Meritorum ejus Contemplatione. The second Advan∣tage which Zosimus would have Patroclus enjoy, was annex'd to the Dignity of his Church,

and concerns the Metropolitical Rights which he ordains him to have over the Province of Gallia Viennensis, and both the Narbonenses, which implies the Right of Ordaining all the Bi∣shops of those Provinces.

Lastly, Zosimus annexed to the Bishoprick of Arles, all the Parishes and Territories which formerly belong'd to it. He added, That all the Contests that should arise in the Provinces of Gallia Viennensis, and Narbonensis, were to be carried to the Bishop of Arles; except the Bu∣siness was of Consequence; in which case, he affirmed it necessary, That he should examine the same himself at Rome: Nisi magnitudo causae nostrum desideret examen. He observes besides in that Letter, That Trophimus was sent to Arles by the See of Rome, and that through his means the Gauls received the Faith of Jesus Christ. This Letter was written soon after the Promotion of Pope Zosimus, the 20th. of March, of the Year 417. It is the Fifth in the common Editions.

About the latter end of that Year he writ Two more; wherein he confirms the Metropolitical Rights to the Church of Arles; rejecting even with Scorn the Canon of the Council at Turin, and condemning Proculus of Marseilles, and Simplicius of Vienna, who opposed his Design. In both those Letters he grounds the Primacy of the Church of Arles upon its being founded by Trophimus, who was sent from the See of Rome. These Letters are the Seventh and the Eighth. The former is directed to the Bishops of Gallia Viennensis; and the second, to Narbonensis; and the latter to Hilary of Narbon, who maintained, That to him belonged the Ordinations of the Bishops of the first Narbonensis. Both these Letters are dated the 27th. of Sep∣tember, 417.

He that most opposed Patroclus, was Proculus. Bishop of Marseilles, who constantly Ordained Bishops in his Province, norwithstanding the Pope's Prohibitions. Zosimus undertook him, and cited him to Rome. But he not much regarding that Citation, continued to maintain his Rights, and to Ordain, as he had done before. This brought upon him a Condemnation from Zo•…•…, who writ against him, not only to Patroclus, but also to the People of Marseilles, That they should Expell him out of his Bishoprick. His Ninth Letter, to Patroclus, is upon this Subject, September 27th. 417. And the Eleventh, to the same, written March 2d. 418. and the Twelfth, to the People of Marseilles, dated on the same day. Yet notwithstanding the Pope's Judgment and Threatnings, Proculus remained peaceable Possessor of his Bishoprick; and was always acknowledged Lawful Bishop, not only by the Gallican, but also by the African Bishops. And St. Jerom tells us, in his Letter to Rusticus, That this Proculus of Marseilles, who was used so ill by the Popes, was a most Holy and Learned Bishop.

The Grudge which Zosimus bore to Proculus, made him Condemn likewise two Bishops Ordained by him, called Ursus and Tuentius,; against whom he writ a Circular Letter to the Bishops of Africa, Gaul and Spain; it is the Seventh, dated September 20th. 417. He saith of these two Persons whom Proculus had Ordained, That they had been both Condemned. The first by Proculus himself, and the second by other Bishops: That this Man, after his Condem∣nation, came to Rome; where he did Penance, and adjured the Errors of the Priscillianists. He reproaches Proculus for regarding neither his Judgment, nor the Judgment of others. He speaks also against Lazarus, whom Proculus Ordained Bishop of Aix, who had assisted at the Ordination of Ursus and Tuentius. He declares, That those Ordinations were Illegitimate, having been performed in prejudice of the Bishop of Arles, who alone had the Right to Ordain in the Provinces of Narbon and Vienna. Lastly, He advises the Bishops of Gaul, Spain and Africa, not to own either Ursus or Tuentius for Bishops, and not to communicate with them.

By these Letters one plainly sees the Reason why Zosimus did so much desire to invalidate the Judgment given against Coelestius and Pelagius. Their Accusers were Heros and Lazarus; Patroclus's Adversaries, and Friends of Proculus of Marseilles. He openly declar'd for Pa∣troclus. He eagerly prosecuted Proculus and his Adherents. He would have been glad to find Matter of Condem••tion against Heros and Lazarus, by causing them to be looked upon as False Accusers. Perhaps this is the only thing that made him favour Coelestius and Pelagius at first: But since both of them were convicted of Heresie by the Bishops of Africa, The Love of Truth prevailed in him, over the secret Satisfaction which he would have had by the Con∣demnation of Heros and Lazarus.

We have three Letters besides ascribed to Zosimus, which do not seem to have had any rela∣tion to either of these Affairs we have now spoken of.

The First is directed to Hesychius, Bishop of Salona; to whom he prescribes with much Impe∣riousness, and with a very Commanding Tone, the Distances which he should cause to be ob∣served between the Sacred Orders. The Date is of February, 418.

The Second is directed to the Clergy of Ravenna. He speaketh there against those who durst go to Court to Complain against him: telling the Clergy of Ravenna, That they were Ex∣communicated. The Letter is of the 2d. of October, of the same Year.

The Last, if it be true, is directed to the Bishops of the Province of Byzacena in Africa; and not to the Bishops of Byzantia, as it is in the common Title. There he blames those Bi∣shops for admitting Lay-men to Judge Church-men. It is dated Novemb. 14th. 418. But it is very probable that it is Supposititious, because it is of a very different Style from the rest.

Zosimus writes purely, and nobly. He speaks with Vigour, and Authority, and turns eve∣ry thing to his own Advantage. He discerneth the weak side of his Adversaries, and omits no∣thing that can do them Hurt. In a word, He writes like a Man throughly skill'd in Business, who••knows the strong, and the weak side of every Thing, and the exact Management of Affairs.

BONIFACE I.

AFter the Death of Pope Zosimus, the Church of Rome was divided about the Election of his Successor. The Arch-Deacon Eulalius, who aspired to the Bishoprick of Rome, shut himself up in the Church of the Lateran, with part of the People, some Priests, and some * 1.172 Deacons, and made them chuse him in Zosimus's room. On the other side, a great Number of Priests, several Bishops, and part of the People, being assembled in the Church of Theodora, elected Boniface. Both were ordained. Eulalius was ordained by some Bishops, among whom was the Bishop of Ostia, who used to ordain the Bishop of Rome. Boniface was likewise or∣dained by a great Number of Bishops, and went to take Possession of St. Peter's Church.

Symmachus, Governour of Rome, having try'd in vain to make them agree, writ to the Em∣peror Honorius about it. In his Letter of the 29th. of December, 418. he speaks in Eulalius's behalf, and judges Boniface to be in the wrong. The Emperor believing his Relation, sent him word immediately, That he should expell Boniface, and uphold Eulalius. The Governour having received this Order, sent for Boniface to acquaint him with it, but he would not come to him; so that the Governour sent to him, to signifie the Emperor's Order, and kept him from returning into the City. The Bishops, Priests, and the People that sided with Boniface, wrote immediately to the Emperor, to entreat him, that he would order both Eulalius, and Boniface, to go to Court, that their Cause might there be judged. To satisfie them, the Emperor sent to Symmachus an Order of the 30th. of January 419. signifying, That he should enjoin Boniface, and Eulalius, to be at Ravenna, about the 6th. of February. Honorius conven'd some Bishops thither to judge of their Cause; and that they might not be suspected of favouring any one side, he commanded, That none of those who had ordained either of them, should be a Judge in the case. The Bishops that were chosen to judge this Cause being divided, the Emperor put off the Judgment till May, and forbad Eulalius, and Boniface, to go to Rome; and sent thither Achilleus, Bishop of Spoleto, to perform the Episcopal Functions, during the Easter Holy-Days. In which time he prepared a numerous Synod, and invited the Bishops both of Africa, and Gaul; but Eulalius could not endure that Delay, and spoiled his business by his impatience: For whether he distrusted his Right, or whether he was of a restless tem∣per, he returned to Rome the 16th. of March, and would have stay'd there, notwithstanding the Emperor's Orders, which obliged Symmachus to use Violence to drive him out of Rome, and the Emperor having been informed of his Disobedience, waited for no other Judgment, but caused Boniface to be put in possession, in the beginning of April 419.

One of the First Things that Boniface did, was to write to the Emperor, to entreat him to make an Edict, to prevent, for the future, the Intrigues, and Cabals that were made use of to get the Bishoprick of Rome. This Letter bears Date the First of July. To cut off the Root of these Divisions, Honorius ordained, That if ever Two Men should be ordained Bishops of Rome, that neither should remain in Possession, but that both the Clergy, and Peo∣ple should chuse a Third.

Boniface's Second Letter, ought to go before this now mentioned, if the order of their Dates were observed, since this is of the 13th. of June 419. It is directed to Patroclus, and to the other Bishops of the Seven Provinces of Gaul, concerning Maximus Bishop of Valence, who was accused, by the Clergy of that City, who had carried their Accusation directly to the Pope, in. all probability about the Contests which had been in that Province, concerning the Right of Primacy. Boniface accuses that Bishop, not only for refusing to appear at Rome to plead for himself, but for avoiding to appear before Provincial Synods, to which he was remit∣ted by the Popes his Predecessors. Yet he declares, That he would not condemn him, because he ought to have been judged in his own Province: Wherefore he desireth them to call a Coun∣cil before the First of November, that he might appear there to make his own defence to the Accusations formed against him; adding, That if he refused to appear, he should hope no longer, that his absence could put a stop to his Condemnation.

For, saith he, it is a shrew'd Mark of a Man's Guilt, who, when he is accused, and has so many occasions of clearing him∣self, yet neglects to make use of them.

Boniface's Third Letter to Hilary, Bishop of Narbonna, of the 2d. of February 422. over∣throws all that Zosimus had done in the behalf of the Church of Arles. For upon the Com∣plaint of the Inhabitants of Lodevae, a City of Gallia Narbonensis Prima, against Patroclus, Bishop of Arles, for ordaining a Bishop without consulting with the Metropolitan, he declares, That it was an. Action against the Canons of the Council of Nice, which he could not pati∣ently bear with, because he was obliged to maintain the Canons. Wherefore he sends word

to the Bishop of Narbon, That if that Church be of his Provence, he should go to that City, and there perform a lawful Ordination, and put a stop to the Bishop of Arles's Presumption, who undertook beyond the Bounds of his Jurisdiction. Lastly, He ordaineth, That for the future, every Province shall be subject to its own Metropolitan. Nothing can be more contra∣ry than the Opinions of Zosimus, and Boniface, concerning the Dignity, and Jurisdiction of the Church of Arles. Zosimus is persuaded, That the Bishop of Arles ought to ordain all the Bishops of Seven Provinces; and Boniface declares, That that is a violation of the Canons. The former saith, That the Bishop of Arles is the sole Metropolitan; and the latter affirmeth, That none can be Metropolitan of Two Provinces. Zosimus is of Opinion, That the Preten∣sions of Hilary, of Narbon, and of the other Metropolitans of the Seven Provinces, that they have a Right to ordain the Bishops of their respective Provinces, are extreamly rash. On the contrary, Boniface maintains, That it is a well-grounded Right; and that the Pretension of the Church of Arles to ordain in those Provinces, is a breach upon the Canons, to which op∣position must be made. The one forbids Hilary of Narbon, to ordain the Bishops of his Pro∣vince, when he asks it of him: The other enjoins him to do it without asking. Can there be a greater contrariety of Opinions betwixt Popes, who succeeded each other immediately. This made St. Leo say in the Epistle to the Bishops of Provincia Viennensis, That the See of Rome had taken away from Patroclus what it had given him, by a more just Sentence, than that by which it was granted. ID IPSUM QUOD PATROCLO A SEDE APOSTOLICA TEMPORALITER VIDEBATUR ESSE CONCESSUM, POSTMODUM ESSE SEN∣TENTIA MELIORE SUBLATUM. Is it because those Popes thought themselves absolute Masters of these Things? If so, Why should they alledge the Canons, and profess to ob∣serve them? Is it because they believed that Privileges attended the Persons of Bishops, and not their Churches? Wherefore then did Zosimus exalt the Dignity, and Antiquity of the Church of Arles so high, because it was founded by Trophimus? We are therefore to conclude, That there is no other Reason of that contrariety, besides the difference of the Opinions of the Two Popes: But which of the Two was in the Right, and which in the Wrong, is a great Business to be decided, which we shall find afterwards sharply debated in the time of St. Leo. In the mean time we may observe, That the common Right was on Boniface's side, and that we do not see any Privilege authentick enough, or any Custom sufficiently established, where∣by we should allow to the Church of Arles, what Zosimus grants to it. There are besides Five of this Pope's Letters to Ruffus Bishop of Thessalonica, and to the Bishops of Illyricum recorded in the Council that was assembled under Boniface II. in 531. Boniface I. was peaceable Possessor of the See of Rome until the Year 423. though there were still some Chri∣stians of Eulalius's Party.

SYNESIUS.

SYNESIUS, originally of Cyrene, a City of Pentapolis, a Platonick Philosopher, and Disciple of the famous Hypatia, having spent part of his Life in worldly Employments, * 1.173 was converted, and chosen Bishop of Ptolemais in the Year 420. He was hardly brought to accept of that Office, which seemed to him to be contrary to that Philosophical Life, wherein he had lived till then: Neither could he resolve to leave his Wife; nor was he yet fully persua∣ded of all the Articles of the Christian Religion. He believed that Souls were created before Bo∣dies, and could not conceive that the World was to have an end: He did not believe the Resurrection of the Dead, as it is believed in the Church; imagining, That what is said in the Scripture, had some mystical, and secret Sence. He urges these Reasons in his 105th. Letter, to prevent their ordaining him Bishop. Baronius thinks, That he did not really hold such Opinions, but that he feigned to have them to avoid the Episcopal Function. But this Conjecture is not at all pro∣bable, because he affirms with an Oath, that he expressed his real Sence: Wherefore it is better to say with the Ancients, that Synesius's Merit, and the need which the Churches of Africa stood in of his Protection in a most difficult time, superseded these Considerations, in hopes that being ordained Bishop, he would submit his Opinions to those of the Church. It is related in the Pratum Spirituale, that when he was Bishop, a very remarkable Thing happened to him; which shews, That he had altered his Opinion, concerning the Resurrection of Bodies. A Heathen Phi∣losopher, one Evagrius, Synesius's old Friend, came to Cyrene. Synesius used all his Endeavours to convert him. After several Sollicitations to that purpose, this Philosopher declared to him at last, That the Resurrection of the Body was one of those Things which he was most displeased with in the Christian Religion. Synesius affirmed, That whatsoever the Christians taught was true, and never left him, till he had Converted, and Baptized him. This Man, sometime after his Baptism, having given Synesius a Summ of Money to distribute to the Poor, demanded a Bond to repay it him again in the next Life. Synesius readily gave him one. The Philosopher kept it, and some time before his Death, commanded his Children to put it into his Coffin. Three Days after, he appeared to Synesius in the Night, and bad him come to his Grave, and take his

Bond, because he was pay'd; and to assure him of it, he had signed a Discharge with his own Hand. Synesius not knowing that his Children had put the Bond in his Coffin, having sent for them, and learned of them how the business had been carried, telling them withal what had happened, went to this Man's Grave, with his Clergy, and the chief Men of the Town, and caused the Coffin to be opened; where they found the Bond, with a Receit newly written in Evagrius's own Hand at the Bottom. The Author of the Pratum Spirituale, relates this History, as having learned it of Leontius of Apamea, who came to Alexandria, in the time of the Patriarch Eulogius, to be Ordained Bishop of Cyrene; adding, That that Man certified, That this Bond was still kept in the Vestry of the Church of Cyrene. This may give some Credit to a Story which would deserve none, were it solely grounded upon the Testimony of the Author of the Pratum Spirituale, who is known to be of no great Authority. How∣ever, Evagrius and Photius affirm, That Synesius was no sooner Ordained Bishop, but he yielded to the Opinion of the Church, concerning the Resurrection.

Synesius's Treatises are Philosophical Discourses, written with great nobleness and loftiness. The Catalogue of them is as follows,

A Discourse of reigning well, spoken in the presence of the Emperor Arcadius about the Year 398. when he was Deputy of his own Province that was wasted by the Barbarians Incursions, to obtain some Succours, and some ••ase of the Emperor. Synesius speaks there of Government with a wonderful freedom, and declaims openly against Courtiers, against the Luxury and Ambition of Princes. He lays down most excellent Instructions for Kings; He shows what are the truly Royal Vertues, and the Qualities of a good Prince. And discovers at last the spring of the Empire's Misfortunes, which was the Credit and Power that was given some time since to the Goths in the Affairs of the Empire. He composed at the same time another Dis∣course directed to P•…•…ius, to whom he sent Astronomical Tables which he had made. This Discourse contains a Commendation of Philosophy, and particularly of Astronomy, with a Description of the Work which he sent.

The Book ••ntituled Dion Prusaeus, begins with the Praises of that great Man, mention'd in Philostratus. There Synesius justifies himself against those that blamed him for applying himself to the Study of Philological Learning, and against such as found fault that the Books he made use of were not very exact. He shews with great Eloquence, That the Study of the fine Learning of Poetry and Rhetorick is of very great Use, and not unworthy of a Philosopher. Afterwards he strongly opposes the second Calumny; proving, That it is sometimes good for the exercise of a Man's Parts to use Copies that are not so very Correct.

The Praise of Baldness, is one of the most Ingenious of all Synesius's Works; and though the Matter seems not to afford much of it self, yet he enlarges and beautifies it with variety of wonderful Reasons and Figures.

The two Books of Providence contain, the History, or rather the Romance of two Brothers, Kings of Egypt, called Osiris and Tytion. It is thought that he describes under those borrow'd Names, the State of the Empire in his time.

In the Book of Dreams, there are several curious Observations upon the Original, Vertue, and Significations of Dreams.

Synesius's Letters are written with inimitable Eloquence, Pureness, and Dexterity: They are full of Historical Passages, Sublime Notions, Fine Railleries, Moral Reflections, and Pious Expressions. There are 155. of them: We shall speak of those only that relate to Religion, and the Church's Affairs, which are but very few.

To this may be referred what he saith in the Fourth Letter of a Shipwrack; He observes, That their Pilot was a Jew, who quitted the Helm on the Saturday's-Eve after Sun-set, and that he could not be perswaded to take it again, what Threatnings soever were used, till the Ship was in an unavoidable Danger of perishing. This Letter is of the beginning of the Year 410.

In the 5th. Letter directed to certain Priests, he Exhorts them to prosecute the Eunomians, and to hinder their Meetings; yet so, that it might appear, that they had no design upon their Estates.

In the 9th. he commends a Letter that was written by Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria.

In the 11th. he declares, How unwilling he was to be made a Bishop, and prays God who called him to that State, to give him strength to discharge the Duties of it with Applause and recommends himself to the Priests and Peoples Prayers both Publick and Private.

In the 12th. he exhorts a Priest and a Bishop called Cyril, to return to the Church from which they had been divided for a time; affirming, That Theophilus, their common Father, had admitted them if he had been alive. This Letter was written after Theophilus's Death, which happened in October 412.

The 13th. is an Epistle written from Alexandria; wherein he assigns the Day to his Clergy when they were to observe the Feast of Easter: The Day there set agrees with the Year 412.

Andronicus Governor of Pentapolis, a cruel Man, exercised several Violences against the Peo∣ple. Synesius, who was of a meek and merciful temper, used all his Endeavours to hinder that Man's Cruelties, and to help those Wretches whom he tormented. Among the rest, he succoured a Man of Quality, Andronicus's Enemy, whom that inexorable Governor persecuted without

any Cause. That charitable Action provok'd him, and made him utter in his Anger these Im∣pious words: That that Unfortunate Man fled to the Church in vain, and that no Man should be taken out of Andronicus's hands, though he held Jesus Christ by the feet. Synesius having heard this Blasphemy, excommunicated him in a Synod held in the Year 411, and with him Thoas, the Chief Minister of all his Cruelties, with his whole Family. After this Excommunication, he pronounced a Discourse against him, which is the 57th. of his Letters. There he describes that Governor's Cruelty; He speaks of his own former Life, and with what reluctancy he accepted the Bishoprick; He bewails the deplorable Condition of his Country, declaring, That he was altogether unfit to manage a Business of that Nature; wherefore he intreats his Brethren, either to choose one in his room, or give him a Collegue that was versed in Business.

In the 58th. Letter, he gives Notice to all Bishops in the Name of the Church of Ptolemais, That an Excommunication was pronounc'd against Andronicus, declaring, That they ought to shut their Church-Doors against him and all his Accomplices; That if any Man receives him, not regarding the Sentence of a small Church, he breaks the Unity of the Church, and that he will have no fellowship with him.

Andronicus struck with that Excommunication, seem'd to be sorry for his Fault, and promised to do Penance. Synesius knowing his humour, did not think fit to admit him; but the other ancienter Bishops were not of that Opinion, and judged that the Excommunication was to be suspended; and that they should forbear sending the Letter that declared him Excommunicated, having taken his word, That thenceforth he should not offer the like Violences. But this Go∣vernor, instead of keeping his Promise, was more Cruel than ever; So that Synesius published the Excommunication that had been pronounced, and wrote to the Bishops to give an Account of the Governor's relapse in the 72d. Letter. He makes another Description of this Governor's Violences in the 79th. But at last this cruel Man received the Punishment of his Cruelties, and was dealt withal as he had dealt with others. Synesius charitably pity'd his Condition, as he observes in the 89th. Letter to Theophilus.

In the 66th. Synesius maliciously asks Theophilus, How he should entertain Alexander, who had been ordained by St. Chrysostom, Bishop of Basinopolis in Bithynia; giving him to understand at the same time, That he approved not of his Behaviour towards those who sided with that holy Patriarch of Constantinople. He readily tells Theophilus, That he reverenc'd his Memory; and, That at least Men ought not to hate an Enemy when he is dead. He adds, That Theophilus himself had writ to Atticus, exhorting him to admit into his Communion those of St. Chryso∣stom's Party. That as for this, Alexander who was born at Cyrene, formerly a Monk, then raised to the Dignity of a Deacon, and a Priest, and at last ordained Bishop of Basinopolis by St. John Chrysostom, that he was withdrawn into his own Country. Synesius durst not admit him to the Communion, nor to partake of the Church's Prayers; but he received him privately into his House, and shewed him much Friendship, it being his Custom so to deal with all guilty Persons. He intreats Theophilus to answer him plainly and clearly, whether he should look upon Alexander as a Bishop, or no? This Letter is of the latter end of the Year 410. or the beginning of 411.

The 57th. to the same Theophilus, contains several remarkable Points of Discipline; shewing the Power of the Bishop of Alexandria over all Egypt. He had appointed Synesius to compose some Disputes among the Bishops of Pentapolis, and in this Letter Synesius gives him an exact account of what he had done. There were in Pentapolis two Villages, Palebiscus and Hidrax, near Libya. Both these had formerly been Subject to the Bishop of Erythra the nearest City. Since that under Orion Bishop of Erythra, an Easie Man; the Inhabitants of both these Villa∣ges had caused a Young Man, Syderius by Name, to be ordained their Bishop, who had served in Valens's Army, that they might have a Man of Courage to protect them; without observing the Formalities requisite in a Legal Ordination, for he was ordained by one only Bishop, and without the Approbation of the Bishop of Alexandria. But this happening when the Heretical Factions were formidable, they forbore the Severity of the Laws: And St. Athanasius caused Syderius to be translated to Ptolemais; but towards the latter end of his Life, he returned to his former Church. After his Death, Palebiscus and Hydrax were reduced to their former depen∣dency upon the Bishop of Erythra; the Inhabitants of those Places being willing, according to the Bishop of Alexandria's Letters, to own Paulus of Erythra, for their Bishop. Since that, Theophilus upon the Information of some particular Men, offered to give them a Bishop, and gave Synesius a Commission to go and ordain him. He being come to the Village, found the People resolved to have no other Bishop but Paul, and could never bring them to consent that he should ordain a particular Bishop. He writ all this to Theophilus, and insinuates; That though the Inhabitants of those Villages were ready to obey, if he would absolutely impose a Bishop upon them; yet it was not convenient to do it.

There was another Business also to be decided at Hydrax. In this Town there was a Castle situate upon an Hill, whereunto belonged a great enclosure, which might have yielded a good income, if they rebuilt the Walls which had been thrown down with an Earthquake. The dispute about it was betwixt Dioscorus Bishop of Dardania, and Paulus of Erythra: The latter to take Possession, consecrated there a Chappel, and alledged, That that place had been long since consecrated. Synesius having examined the case, found that formerly Publick Prayers had been made in that Castle during the Barbarians Incursions. But he thought that this was not

sufficient to make the place Sacred, because that by the same Reason, all others would prove Consecrated places, wherein Publick Prayers, and Holy Mysteries had been celebrated in time of War. As for the Chappel, it was proved that Paul had consecrated it to make himself Master of the Place. Synesius declared, That it was an ill Example, to make use of the Church's Prayers, of the Holy Table, and of the Mystical Veil, to invade another Man's Estate. And so far from looking upon that Chappel as consecrated, he made no Scruple of declaring it to be common.

For, saith he, we are to distinguish Superstition from true Religion. Superstition is a Vice adorned with the Name of Vertue; but Wisdom makes us discover it to be a third sort of Impiety: And so I do not think that there is any Sanctity in a thing unjustly undertaken; neither do I regard the Consecration that is alledged. It is not with Christians as with Hea∣thens. They do not imagine that their God is made to come down with Words and Cere∣monies; They require a pure Heart, and free from Passions: And when Wrath or Anger causes Ministers to act, they do not believe that the Holy Ghost accompanies their Motions.

Paul did not refuse to take away the Chappel, but since Synesius urged to have it done, he pre∣sented a Petition full of Invectives against Dioscorus, but he soon confessed his Fault and begg'd Pardon. Then Dioscorus, who would yield nothing whil'st Paul disputed it, proposed of him∣self to come to an Agreement with Paul about that Castle, and so exchanged it, with some Lands hard by, for some other Lands which Paul gave him in another place, which lay more convenient for him, though of less Value. Synesius gave Theophilus an account of all this, and commended Dioscorus for relieving the Poor of Alexandria.

A Third Business that Synesius had order to compose, was a Quarrel betwixt two private Per∣sons, Jason and Lamponianus; The latter being accused to have Slandered the other, chose rather to confess, than to be convicted, and was required to do Penance, and to separate from the As∣semblies of the Faithful. The People requested that he might be Absolved. Synesius referred the Matter to the Bishop of Alexandria, and only gave order to the Priests to admit him to the Communion of the Church, if he should be in danger of Death: For, saith he, as much as in me lies, I will take Care that no man shall die bound with Ecclesiastical Bonds. He adds, That Absolution should not be granted in case of Necessity, but upon this Condition, That if he Re∣cover, he shall be in the same State as before. Lamponianus was indebted to the Church One hundred forty seven Crowns of the Poor's Money, which he had lost by some Misfortune, which he promised to pay; but required time to Work, that he might get that Summ.

Synesius writ again to Theophilus about some Abuses that were practised in those Parts. Bi∣shops accused one another of Ill Behaviour, rather to make the Governors get Money, than because they had any Grounds for so doing. Synesius prays him to make an Order directed to him, whereby that Abuse might be forbidden; but without reproving any particularly, that it might not appear that he had accused them. He saith, That with such an Order, he would put a stop to that Infamy of Bishops. For, saith he, God forbid that I should say, the Infamy of the Church. He observes, That this will turn to greater Advantage for the Accusers, than for the Accused, because they shall be delivered from a greater Evil, since it is a greater Evil to do injury, than to suffer; because the one comes from our selves, and the other concerns other Men. The last thing which Synesius acquaints Theophilus withal, is concerning certain Bishops, who quitted their Bishopricks without being expelled, to go from Church to Church, to receive there the Honours due to their Character. His Opinion is, That they should not be received, nor Prece∣dency given them; that they might be obliged to return to their Churches. And thus, he thinks, those ought to be dealt withal in Publick; as to what should be done privately, he waits for an Answer to the Letter he writ to Theophilus, concerning Alexander, which is that now mention'd; He concludes this Letter with these very humble words: Pray to God for me, and you shall Pray for a poor for lorn Man who wants all things; and needs help, not daring to address to God for himself; for I perceive that every thing is against me, since I undertook to Minister at the Altar, who am laden with Sins; who was brought up out of the Church, and followed all my life-time a Profession different from this. This Letter is of the Year 411.

In the 76th. Letter Synesius recommends to Theophilus, Antonius, who had been chosen Bishop of Olbiata, a Town of his Province, and was going to Alexandria, to be ordained by Theophilus, according to the Custom of that time.

The 95th was written by Synesius, Seven Months after he was made Bishop; He expresses, with what difficulty he accepted of the Office, and begs of God Grace to discharge it well.

The 105th. is that famous Letter which he writ to his Brother, when he was chosen Bishop of Cyrene; wherein he sets down the Reasons that kept him from being promoted to that Dig∣nity. The rest of the Letters contain nothing that is remarkable touching Religion.

We have but two Homilies of Synesius which are not entire. The First is the beginning of a Homily upon God's Law, of which he understandeth what is said in the 75th. Psalm, In the Hand of the Lord there is a Cup, &c.

The Second is likewise imperfect. It is the Fragment of a Sermon preached upon Easter-Eve. Both these Fragments shew, That Synesius did not excel in this kind so much as he did in others; yet he was Eloquent, and composed Pieces of Rhetorick very well; as appears by his Discourse concerning the Ruine of his Province; And by his Panegyrick upon Anysius, which come after the two Homilies now mentioned; but there is a particular sort of Eloquence neces∣sary for the Pulpit, which he seems not to have had. He had a better genius for Hymns; We

have Ten of his which are very excellent, in which there are some Platonick Principles con∣cerning the Trinity. This Author ascribes much to God's Help, and to the Grace of Jesus Christ, which he requires us to ask by fervent Prayer, that we may be delivered from those Passions and disorderly Desires of Lust, wherewith we are transported. We have lost a Philoso∣phical Work of his, Intituled, Cynegeticks, mentioned in the 153d. Letter.

Synesius's Stile, according to Photius's Judgment, is great and lofty, but something Poetical.

He chiefly excelleth in Narratives and Descriptions. He varies the Matters which he treats of, with long Prefaces, and frequent Digressions. He makes them agreeable by excellent Passages out of Histories and Fables, and by the best Thoughts of the Profane Poets. His Philosophy hath nothing harsh or disgusting. He has found a way to render it pleasant and easie. He seems to have designed only to recreate, when he discovers the main Points of Wisdom. The Reader is brought insensibly to the Knowledge of most Important Truths, when he thought to read only pleasant Relations. He observes in his first Letter, That he writ two sorts of Books, some of the most refined Philosophy, and others Rhetorical Pieces; but that they are easily known to be all written by the same Person, who applies himself sometimes to serious things, and some∣times to pleasant ones.—And indeed, it maintains every where the same Character. His Philosophi∣cal Works are adorned with Rhetorical and Poetical Figures, and his Pieces of Eloquence are sup∣ported with Philosophical Thoughts. He had a thorough Knowledge of Plato's Writings, and from that Fountain, he drew the noblest and the sublimest Notions in the old Philosophy, concerning the Knowledge of the Supream Being, and Principles of Morality. He wrote but little touching our Religion, and he was far from understanding it so well as he did Plato's Philosophy. Yet one may see by his Letters that he was a very Wise, Prudent and good Bishop. He avoided Business as much as he could; but when he was ingaged, he acted very dexterously, and brought every thing to a good issue. His Behaviour was accompanied with great Freedom and Uprightness of Heart. He wanted neither Courage nor meekness, as there was occasion. His endeavours to avoid being a Bishop, and his manner of speaking of himself, show his great Humility. The Year of his Death is not known.

The Book of Dreams was Printed in Greek and Latin, Translated by Ficinus, at Venice in 1497. and at Lyons in 1541. In 1553. Turnebus published most of his Works in Greek. The Letters were Printed in Greek at Venice in 1499. at Basle in 1558. and at Paris in 1605. with Turnebus's Translation. The Hymns were likewise Printed in 1590. with the Poems of St. Gregory Nazi∣anzen, and those of St. Cyril of Alexandria, and Reprinted in 1603. in Latin by Portus. In 1653. Janus Cornarius translated most of Synesius's Works, and his Translation was Printed at Basle in 1560. The Discourse of Government of the same Translation, was Printed by it self at Francfort in 1583.

At last, Petavius having review'd and translated a new all Synesius's Works, caused them to be Printed in Greek and Latin at Paris by Morellus in 1612. With Nicephorus's Notes and Com∣mentary upon the Book of Dreams. This Edition was corrected and augmented in 1640. wherein Synesius's Works are joined with St. Cyril's Catechetical Lectures.

POLYCHRONIUS.

POLYCHRONIUS Bishop of Apamea, Brother of Theodorus of Mopsuesta, and Disci∣ple of Diodorus of Tarsus, writ some Commentaries upon Job and Ezekiel; whereof you * 1.174 may find some Fragments in the Greek Catenae, and in St. John Damascen, if any Credit may be given to that sort of Quotations. There are Spurious Acts of St. Sixtus with Polychronius, dated after his Death. He lived about the latter End of the Fourth Century.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Evagrius Ponticus.
• * 1.2

  Mark.
• * 1.3

  Simplicia∣nus, Bishop of Milan.
• a 1.4

  THere were several of this Name.] This is the ancientest. There was another of Africa, who writ upon the Revelations, mention'd by Cas∣siodorus in the 9th. Chap. of his Institutions. Gen∣nadius, Chap. 51. speaketh of a Deacon called Vi∣gilius, who wrote a Rule for the Monks. Vigilius, Bishop of Tapsus in Africa, famous for his Writings against Nestorius and Eutyches, is a different Person from all these. There was one Vigilius, the Seventh Bishop of Brescia after Philastrius. One Vigilius a Bishop subscribed in the Council of Agatha or Ag∣de. But these Names cannot be taken one for the other, without mistaking the Chronology and Hi∣story.
• b 1.5

  Bishop of Trent.] It is certain that Vigilius, Bishop of Trent, lived at the latter end of the 4th. Century, because the 24th Letter of S. Ambrose is di∣rected to him. Usuardus saith, that he suffered Mar∣tyrdom under the Consulate of Stilichon, who was Consul in 400 and 405. There is more probability that it was in 400, because in that very Year Sifin∣nius suffered Martyrdom.
• * 1.6

  Vigilius of Trent.
• c 1.7

  'Tis believ'd that that Simplicianus to whom it is dedicated, is the Successor to S. Ambrose in the Church of Milan.] This Conjecture of Miraeus is indeed probable; this Letter is directed to one Simplicia∣nus a Bishop. He of Milan lived at that time; and Paulinus observes in the Life of S. Ambrose, that the Reliques of Sisinnius were sent to Milan. It is true that Gennadius having spoken of Simplicianus as of an Author and Bishop known to him; and then, speaking of Vigilius his Letter, he doth not say that it was directed to him, but only, ad quemdam Sim∣plicianum, to one Simplician; which makes it doubt∣full, Whether it was to the Bishop of Milan that this Letter was directed. But perhaps Gennadius did not think upon it. However, Vigilius, Bishop of Trent, both lived and wrote at the same time that Simpli∣cianus was Bishop of Milan.
• a 1.8

  IN the Year 348.] He saith in the Preface to the Cathemerinon, that he was born under the Consulship of Salia; for so we are to read and understand that Place.

  Oblitum veteris me Saliae Consulis arguens Sub quo prima dies mihi.

  Most Authors understood not the meaning of it; as, Aldus, Sixtus Senensis, Possevinus, and even Labbée, who believed that he was Consul in a City called Messalia, which is thought by Labbée to be Marse∣illes; That's a mistake: They took the Name of the Consul Salia, who was Consul with Philippus in the Year 348, for the Name of a Town; and so they ascribed to Prudentius the Consular Dignity that belonged to Salia, under whose Consulship Pruden∣tius came into the World. In the same place he says that he was 57 Years, old when he began to write, which shews that it was in the Year 405.
• * 1.9

  Prudentius.
• b 1.10

  Prudentius his whole Work.] This Abridge∣ment is ascribed by some to Amoenus; and Georgi∣us Fabricius observeth, that it goes under his Name in a Manuscript belonging to one of Strasburg. It is also printed under the same Name in some Editions of the Bibliotheca Patrum. In all the Ma∣nuscripts, Prudentius is said to be the Author of it; and Aldus says, that he saw an Ancient one where the Title of it was Dittochaeon, or Dyrrochaeon: But it is not to be wonder'd at, if the Abridgement of Prudentius's Works made by one Amoenus, should be taken for the very Work of Prudentius, and per∣haps this is the Cause of its being lost.
• * 1.11

  Diadschus.
• * 1.12

  [Spiritual in the As∣cetical Style is to be under∣stood of those extraordinary Exercises and Mortifications, which the old Monks and Hermites obliged themselves to observe, over and above the ordinary Duties of the Christian Life, that every Christian was by his Prosession, made at his Baptism, bound to practise.]
• * 1.13

  Audentius.
• * 1.14

  Severus En∣delechius.
• * 1.15

  Flavianus.
• * 1.16

  [Photius cod. 52. of his Bi∣bliotheca speaks of a Letter written by Flavianus to the Bishops of Osrhoëne, and of another to an Armenian Bishop.]
• a 1.17

  SIr-named Chrysostom, &c.] It is not known when he was first called by that Name, so justly given him: Some say he had it in his Life-time, but neither S. Jerom, nor S. Augustin, nor Theodoret, nor any other among the Ancients, give him that Name, but call him onely John of Constantinople. Sozomen observes, that Antiochus Bi∣shop of Ptolemais, had this Name given him, but does not say, that it was common to him with our Saint. Many Authors have written his Life, but very few have done i•• faithfully. Palladius alone may be credited in this Case. Bigotius published the Original Greek of this Author, and with him may be joined Socrates, Sozomen and Theodoret, who have in their Ecclesiastical Histories, given an Ac∣count of several Circumstances of the Life of St. Chrysostom. Theodoret made some Speeches in his Commendation, the Extracts whereof are prefer∣ved by Photius, in the 273 Volume. Little regard is to be had to the other Writers of his Life: for they have filled their Relations with Fables. The first of them is George, who is thought to have been Bishop of Alexandria. Some think that part of his Relation was taken out of S. Cyril of Alexandria, but that is not probable. This Author lived about the Year of Christ 600. After him Leo the Empe∣rour, Simeon Metaphrastes, an Anonymus Author, S. John Damascene, Cosmas Vestitor, John Euchaita, the Patriarch Philotheus, and Matthaeus Camariota, have written Lives and Panegyricks of our Saint; but very ill, and stuffed with many Fables.
• * 1.18

  S. John Chryso∣stom.
• b 1.19

  His Mother's Anthusa.] There was another John, Son of Publia, mentioned by Theodoret in his History, l. 3. c. 19. for in the first place all Histo∣rians assure us, that S. John Chrysostom's Mother was called Anthusa; as Palladius in his Life, c. 5. So∣crates in his History, l. 6. c. 3. Secondly, Publia was an old Woman in the Time of Julian the Emperour, in the Year 362. according to Theod••∣ret, and S. Chrysostom's Mother, was alive in 404, as appeareth by his own Letters, the 238th, and 239th, and she was but 40 Years of Age in the Year 368. In short, John the Son of Publia was an only Child; whereas S. Chrysostom had a Sister older than himself, to whom he writ his 238th Letter.
• c 1.20

  He lost his Father when he was young.] St. Chrysostom says it in his first Book of Priesthood, c▪ 1. Some have affirmed that his Parents were Pa∣gans, but he says himself in the first Homily a∣gainst the Anomaeans, that he was bred and brought up in the Church; and it is clear by the place we have quoted out of his Book of the Priesthood, that his Mother was a Christian when his Father died, which was soon after he was born.
• d 1.21

  He first designed to follow the Law.] Some say, that he was called to the Bar, but Palladius, So••rates and Sozomen, only say, that when he was fit for it he quitted it. There is a Letter of Liba∣nius to one John to congratulate him for a publick Pleading, wherein he had spoken much to the Praise of the Emperour and of his Children. But this John is not our S. John Chrysostom, who was then a Priest: For this was the Emperour Theodosius, who left the Empire to his Sons about the Year 393. S. Chrysostom indeed confesseth in his first Book of the Priesthood, that he did follow the Bar, but does not mention his Pleading. Such was his Eloquence, that Libanius at his Death said, that he alone was worthy to succeed him, if the Christians had not snatched him away.
• e 1.22

  Basil his Friend.] It is not certainly known who this Basil was, nor Bishop of what place; but it is certain, that he was not the great S. Basil, Bi∣shop of Caesarea in Cappadocia. Socrates and Sozo∣men, have improperly confounded them; for Basil Chrysostom's Friend was of his own Age, and in∣structed by the same Masters, as appeareth by the be∣ginning of S. Chrysostom's Book of the Priest hood; whereas S. Basil was much older, and was Bishop of the Church of Caesarea, before St. Chrysostom was 25 Years old: Photius tells us, that Basil S. Chrysostom's Friend, was Basil of Seleucia. This is yet a grosser mistake, because this latter was not ordained Bi∣shop before the Year 431, and he lived till 458. Basil S. Chrysostom's Companion, was rather Bishop of Raphanea, or another of the same Name Bishop of Bibl••s, whose Names are found in the Subscrip∣tions of the Council of Constantinople.
• f 1.23

  There is no Commentary of S. Chrysostom's upon Jeremiah.] There was a Manuscript in some Libraries that went under S. Chrysostom's Name; but it was so pitifull a business, that it was not judged worth publishing: no more th•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Scholia upon the Gospels of S. Matth••••, S. M••••k, and S. Luke.
• g 1.24

  S. Matthew's whole Gospel is expounded in 90 Homilies.] In the Translation there are 91, but the 29th is divided into two, though it is but one in the Greek Original; and so the Translation ought to be mended in the Number of the Homi∣lies upon S. Matthew, and the Greek Text to be corrected in the Number of the Homilies upon S. John; for though it distinguishes 88 Homilies, yet there are but 87, because the Preface is not to be reckoned one of them.
• h 1.25

  Part of these Homilies were preached at Anti∣och, and the other at Constantinople.] Photius ob∣serves, that it is easie to know which Homilies St. Chrysostom preached at Antioch; because they are more elaborate than those that were preached at Constantinople. But though this general Rule may serve to distinguish them, yet some particulars in the Homilies themselves are remarkable, to deter∣mine where they were preached. It is evident, that the Homilies upon Genesis, were preached at Con∣stantinople, as we observed before after Photius, for he speaks positively in the 33d Homily upon Gene∣sis, which is the 28th according to Photius, who reckoneth but 61 Homilies upon Genesis. Erasmus believed, that the 54 Homilies upon the Acts were not S. Chrysostom's; and Sir Henry Savil seems to have doubted of it: but without ground, for they are written in his style, and in several places he dis∣covers himself. The style of the Homilies upon the Psalms, shews that they were preached at Anti∣och, not to mention the Authority of George of A∣lexandria, and some other modern Greeks that con∣firm the same. It cannot be known when he made the Commentary upon Isaiah. The seventh Homi∣ly upon S. Matthew, shews plainly, that it was preach'd at Antioch; for he says there, that they, to whom he spake, boasted of being Inhabitants of that City, where the Name of Christians took its be∣ginning. That Town is again pointed at in the 68th Homily, according to the Latin, and the 67th according to the Greek: Whereby it is manifest, that these Homilies were preached at Antioch. In the 21st Homily upon the Epistle to the Corinthians, he plainly says, that he was preaching at Antioch. In the 3d Homily upon the Epistle to Titus, he makes mention of Daphne, a Suburb of Antioch, as belonging to the Town where he preached. The Sermons upon the Epistle to the Colossians were preached at Constantinople; for in the 3d Homily he speaks with Episcopal Authority, threatning Sin∣ners to deny them the Peace of the Church; he also mentions the Episcopal Throne whereon he was sitting, and calls himself Bishop. Of the same time are the Homilies upon the Epistles to the Thes∣salonians: In the eleventh upon the first Epistle, he says, that he presided over them that heard him. The same is to be taken notice of in the 4th Homily upon the second Epistle. In the 4th upon the Epi∣stle to the Hebrews, he threatens to put those out of the Church, who should hire Mourners at the Fu∣nerals of their Relations, which justifies his being Bishop. In the 26th Homily upon the second Epi∣stle to the Corinthians, there are these words, That the Son of Constantine caused his Father to be buried in this City. As to the rest, there is no certain proof from what he says, to tell us where they were preached: but the style of the Homilies upon the Epistles to the Romans, and to the Galatians, being smoother and more polished; whereas that of the Homilies upon the Epistles to the Ephesians, Phi∣lippians, and Philemon, being careless and without Art; we may believe, according to Photius his Rule, that the former were preached at Antioch, and the latter at Constantinople.
• i 1.26

  There are several which are rejected as not being S. Chrysostom's.] There are Extracts, out of the Homily of the Holy Ghost, out of the Dis∣course upon these Words, Jesus Christ is the last, &c. of the Sermon upon the Incarnation, and the Guardian Angels; of the Treatise which proves, that both the Old and the New Testament have the same Law-giver; of the Discourse upon these Words of S. Paul, My Grace is sufficient for thee, &c. The Homily of the Holy Ghost is in the sixth Volume of the Paris Edition: See the 221st, and 222d page. The Homily upon the Nativity, and of the Angels, are in the Eton Edition, Vol 5. pag. 843. That of the Law-giver in the Old and New Testament, is the first of the sixth Volume of the Paris Edition: There is also in the same Volume the Discourse upon those Words of the Apostle, My Grace is sufficient for thee; the Sermon upon these Words, 2 Cor. c. 11. If any one be in Christ, let him be a new Creature, &c.
• k 1.27

  But one ought not to pass the same Judgment upon those which Theodoret quotes in his Dialogues, which are certainly S. Chrysostom's, and which are now en∣tant most of them.] He quotes a Discourse preached by S. Chrysostom, after the Speech of the Gothick Ambassadour, which is not found among S. Chry∣sostom's Discourses. The second passage which he quotes in the first Dialogue, is taken out of the Ho∣mily of the Nativity, Vol. I. pag. 426. The Ho∣mily which Theodoret cites, under this Title, A dogmatical Homily, shewing that which is said of Jesus Christ, seems unworthy of the Power, and of the Di∣vinity, is that which is entituled, Of Consubstantia∣lity, which is in the first Volume, pag. 360. The place which he quotes out of the Commentary up∣on Psal. 41. is not in that which is now extant: I have not found the Homily of the Confusion of Lan∣guages, nor the Passage taken out of the Homily, preached in the great Church. The Homilies a∣gainst those who affirm, that Daemons govern the things of this World, against those that fast upon Easter-day, and the Homily of Christ's Assumption, are among those that we have; as well as the Pas∣sages taken out of Theodoret's Commentaries upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, upon the Gospel of S. John, and that of S. Matthew.
• l 1.28

  Almost all these Discourses have the Style of the La∣tin Preachers, &c.] They are full of allusions to words, of rhiming Sentences, as Psal. 33. Eja fratres mei, hic modo respondere volo; quanti modo dicunt; ••••lo, qui jam dicebant, volo. To this may be added, this fine Notion. Oracula sanctoe lectionis, quae sonant in auribus vestris, nidum faciant in cordibus vestris. One may find also Explications of Latin and Greek Terms, as upon Psal. 90. Meridies dicitur, quia dividit diem; meros enim pars est divisae diei. And upon Psal. 118. Veritas tres sunt syllabae & septem lite∣rae, quia in septima die Deus requievit ab operibus suis. There are several such passages which justify their Author to be a Latin. The style is sententious, con∣cise, and full of Antitheses, and strokes of Wit, which are ordinary faults in the Latin Preachers, to which S. Chrysostom was never liable.
• m 1.29

  The method is quite different from his.] St. Chrysostom divides his Discourses into three Parts. The first is a Preface: The second an Exposition of one or more places of Scripture: And the third a moral Exhortation. This Division may always be observed, in S. Chrysostom's Sermons. These have nothing like, they have neither Preface, nor moral Exhortation, neither do they conclude with the Doxology. The Author divides the Scripture into Verses, and cites Latin Authors, as S. Cyprian and Hippolytus; which S. Chrysostom never did.
• n 1.30

  In a word, the matters treated of, are not such as S. Chrysostom uses to discourse of.] St. Chry∣sostom always handleth Points of Morality, or com∣mon Doctrine; he never insists upon thorny and hard Questions, but avoiding them carefully, he expounds the Letter of the Scripture, and that in a plain way. The Author of these Sermons doth the quite contrary, he fills them with common places, upon Original Sin, Predestination, Grace, and hardning of the Heart, &c. Questions which S. Chrysostom never meddled with. This Author seeks for the allegorical and mystical Sence, and takes little notice of the literal. In short, nothing can be imagined more unlike to S. Chrysostom's way of writing, than the Sermons here examined.
• o 1.31

  All these Homilies are either Sermons of Latin Authors, whereof some are among those of S. Chryso∣logus.] The 13th, and 16th, are amongst those at∣tributed to S. Chrysologus: The 17th is among those that are attributed to Origen; the 6th is taken out of the 15th Homily of S. Chrysostom, upon S. Mat∣thew. The 21st and 22d, are part of the 32d and 33d Homilies of the imperfect Work upon S. Mat∣thew: The 25th is taken out of the 37th Homily of the same. The 27th and 28th, out of the 40th Homily. The Commentary upon S. Mark, is writ∣ten by some ignorant Monk.
• p 1.32

  The imperfect Commentary upon S. Matthew, &c.] The Author of this Treatise cites the Scrip∣ture according to the vulgar Version, he quotes A∣pocryphal Books, as that of Seth, Ezechias, and the Itinerary of S. Clement. He has heretical Notions concerning the Trinity, as in the 49th Homily, where he calls the Catholicks Homoousian Hereticks. In the 7th Homily, he rejects the Baptism of He∣reticks. In the first Homily he speaks ill of Marri∣age; and condemns second Marriages, Homily 32d. Sixtus Senensis pretends that these Errours, and e∣specially those that concern the Trinity, have been added since, because they are not in some ancient Manuscripts, and also because in some places, he teaches the Divinity of the Son. However, he con∣fesses with all the Criticks, that it is not S. Chryso∣stom's, but a Latin Authors: There are some short Commentaries upon S. Mark, S. Luke and S. Mat∣thew ascribed to S. Chrysostom, and printed at Paris 1576. which bear S. Chrysostom's Name, but are none of his.
• q 1.33

  By several Greek Authors.] These Authors are Anastasius in the MS. Collections of the Library of Clermont, Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople, in two MSS. in Mr. Colbert's Library, an Author that wrote against the Severians, published by Turrianus; S. John Damascen, Tom. 4. Var. Lect. Canisii p. 211. [Theorianus in Legatione ad Armenios, p. 74.] these Frag∣ments are in the Rotterdam [and London] Editions.
• † 1.34

  The words in the Origi∣nal are these, Si∣cut enim antequam sanctifice∣tur PA∣NIS, PANEM nomina∣mus, Divi∣nâ autem illum san∣ctificante Gratiâ, me∣diante Sa∣cerdote, Li∣beratus est quidem Appellati∣one pa∣nis, dignus autem habitus est DOMINICI CORPORIS appellatione, etiamsi natura Panis in eo permansit, & non duo corpora, sed unum corpus filii praeditatur: Sic & hic Divinâ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, id est, insidente corporis Naturâ unum fi∣lium, unam Personam, utraque haec fecerunt: Agnoscendum, tamen inconfusam & Indivisibilem rationem, non in unâ solum Naturâ, sed in duabus perfectis: Thus translated into English, by the Learned Defender of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England, against the Bishop of Meaux.

  For as [in the Eucharist] before the Bread is Consecrated, we call it Bread, but when the Grace of God by the Priest has Consecrated it, it is no longer called Bread, but is esteem'd worthy to be called the Lord's Body, altho' the Nature of Bread still remains in it; and we do not say there be two Bodies, but one Body of the Son; so here the Divine Nature, being joyn'd with the [Humane] Body, they both together make up but one Son, one Person. But yet they must be Confessed to remain without confusion, after an indivisible manner, not in one Nature, but in two perfect Natures.

  Now if we suppose that S. Chrysostom designed his Comparison to be just, or believed that it was so, it will not be easie to find other words more expressive of the Sence of the Church of England in this matter, than those here made use of: and there is no Dispute, but those who took so much Pains to conceal this Testimony, believed that the greatest force that could be put upon this Passage, could never persuade unconcerned Readers, that the Person who wrote it believ'd that Doctrine of the Eucharist, which is at present taught in the Church of Rome.]
• ‖ 1.35

  The matter of Fact was in short this; Bi∣gotius ha∣ving brought a Copy of this Letter from Flo∣rence, annexed it to his Edition of Palladius's Life of S. Chrysostom, which was Printed at Paris, 1680. In his Pre∣face, he Vindicated its Authority against those Exceptions, which had before been made to it: and being afraid that the Licensers might suppress it, he reserved some few entire Printed Copies of the Book, before it came into their hands. His fears proved very Reasonable, for some of the Doctors of the Sorbonne, whereof Mr. Grandin, and Mr. Favre were charged as Principal, suppressed the Letter it self, and cut out so much of the Preface of Mr. Bigotius, as related to it, without taking care to fill up the Blank. The Learned Vindicator of the Exposition of the Do∣ctrine of the Church of England, against M. de Meaux, tells the Story, and Prints that part of Bigotius's Preface which was erased, with S. Chrysostom's Letter to Caesarius, at the end of his Vindication, in London, 1688. And this explains Mr. Du Pin's particular Considerations, leaving every Body to guess at the true Reason.]
• * 1.36

  In lib. Quod Chri∣stus sit De∣us: In O∣rat. de S. Babylâ: contra Gen∣tes: In ex∣posit. Ps. xliv. Hom. contra Judaeos: Hom. 4. in illud, Vid. Dominum lib. Quod unus Chri∣stus sit Deus.
• * 1.37

  In Ps. xliv.
• * 1.38

  Orat. con∣tra Genti∣les, de S. Babyla.
• * 1.39

  Orat. 1. de incompreh. Homil. 24. in Joannem.
• * 1.40

  Ib. Orat. 1
• * 1.41

  Ep. ad Caesarium, Homil. de Consub in lib. Quod Chri∣stus sit Deus. V. Theodor. in Dialog.
• * 1.42

  Homil de B. Philog. Hom. de S S. Homil. 39. in ep. 1. ad Cor. & Hom. 28. in ep. ad Hebr. Hom. 29. Matth.
• * 1.43

  Homil. 3. de Incompreh. Hom. 3. in ep. ad Coloss. Hom. 14. in ep. ad Hebr.
• * 1.44

  Hom. de Diabolo tenta∣tore. Hom. 22. in Gene∣sim.
• * 1.45

  De verbis Jer. Hom. 1. Hom. 2. in 1. ad Cor. Hom. 41. in Genesim. Hom. de tri∣bus pueris. Hom. 12. in ep. ad Hebr. & 8. in ep. ad Phil. & 19. ibid Hom. 17. in Joan. Hom. 18. in ep ad Rom. & 12. in ep. 1. ad Cor. In Matth. Hom. 83. Hom. 45. in Joan. In orat. de S. Pelagia. Serm. de Zachaeo. Hom. 34. in Matth. Hom. 80. in ep. ad Rom. Hom. 16. & 18. in ep. ad Rom. & Hom. de obscur. Prophet. Serm. 5. de Lazaro. Hom. 45. in Matth.
• * 1.46

  Hom. de Bapt. Chri∣sti.
• * 1.47

  In Serm. ad Illumi∣nandos.
• * 1.48

  Ibid.
• * 1.49

  Hom. 51. & 83. in Matth. Hom. 45. in Joan. Serm. de de prodit. Judae. Hom. 45. & 46. in Joan∣nem. L. 3. de Sacerdot. c. 4. Hom. 24. in ep. ad Cor. Hom. 3. in ep. ad Eph. Hom. 51. in Matth. Hom. 52. de S Eustathio. Hom. 14. & 17. in ep. ad Hebr. l. 6. de Sacer. c. 1. Hom. 51. in Matth. Hom. 15. in ep. ad Cor. Serm. de prodit. Judae. Hom. in S. Eust. Hom. 33. in Nat. Domini. Serm. de p••odit. Judae.
• * 1.50

  Hom. 83. in Matth. Hom. 21. ad Pop. Hom. 22. ad Pop. Ant. l. 6. De Sacerdot. c. 4. Hom. in Christi Natalem.
• * 1.51

  Hom. 72. in Matth.
• * 1.52

  Hom. 41. in 1. ad Cor. Hom. de Seraphim.
• * 1.53

  Hom. 15. in ep. ad Cor. Hom. 3. in ep. ad Eph. Hom. 17. in ep. ad Hebr. Hom. 29. ad Pop. Ant. Hom. 17. & 83. in Matth. Hom. 24. in ep. ad Cor. Hom. 31. de B. Phi∣logonio. Hom. 24. in ep. ad Cor. Hom. 33. in Matth.
• * 1.54

  L. 3. de Sa∣cerdot. ibid. Hom. ad illu∣min. Hom. de Davide & Saul. Hom. de Diab. tentatore. Hom. de B. Philogonio. Hom. 9. de Poenitentiâ.
• * 1.55

  In Hom. de Poenit.
• * 1.56

  Hom. 21. ad Pop. Ant. Hom. 9. de in∣compreh. Dei natura. Hom. 8. de Poenitentiâ. Hom. 9. de Poenitentiâ. Hom. 20. in Genesim. Hom. in Ps. 50. Hom. 11. in Lazarum. In Hom. de non evulgandisfra∣trum peccatis. Serm. de poenit. & moestitia Regis Achab. Hom de bapt. Christi.
• * 1.57

  Hom. 22. ad Pop. Ant. De Davide & Saul, Hom. 3. Hom. 17. in Matth. Hom. 4. in ep. ad Hebr. In lib. contra gent. de S. Babyla. Hom. de Anathemate.
• † 1.58

  Hom. 9. in Genesim.
• * 1.59

  In Hom. de SS. In Orat. de S. Babyla. Hom. de B. Philogonio. Hom. 2. ad pop. Antioch Hom. 1. in ep. ad Thess. Hom. 1. in illud Modico vino utere. Hom. 21. in Acta. Hom. 41, 42. in 1 ad Cor.
• * 1.60

  Hom de bapt. Christi.
• * 1.61

  Ibid.
• * 1.62

  Hom. 3. de Incompreh.
• * 1.63

  Hom. 3 & 4. de Statuis. Hom. 11. in Genes. Serm 3. & 4. de Lazaro. Hom. 1. & 2. in Matth. Hom. 10. 30, 32, 58. in Joannem. Hom. 11. & 31. in Eundem. Hom. 1. in ep. ad Rom. Hom. 9. in ep. ad Colos. Hom. 19. in Acta.
• * 1.64

  Homiliae in Sacram Scripturam.

  • IN Genesim Graec. Lat. Morel. 1594.
  • Lat. Oecolampad. interpret. Paris, 1524.
  • In Psalmos, Nivelle, 1606.
  • In Isaiam. Lat. à Tilmanno, Paris, 1555.
  • Argumentum in Jeremiam, Gr. Aug. 1602.
  • In Matth. Gr. Oxonii, Lat. 1537.
  • Opus Imperfectum, in Matth. ex Off. Caveleriana, 1602.
  • De publicano & Pharisaeo, Paris, 1595.
  • Serm. 4. in Lazarum, in illud Apostoli, Nolite de Dormientibus contristari, &c. Oxon. 1580.
  • In Joannem. Aret. interprete, Romae, 1470.
  • In omnes Pauli Epistolas Graec. à Donato Vero∣nensi, An. 1529. in fol. 3. Vol. Lat. apud Hervag. 1530.
  • In Ep. ad Galatas, interpret. Erasmo, Basiliae, 1526.
  • In Ep. ad Philip. Flaminio interprete, Rom. 1578.

  TRACTATUS.

  • De Sacerdotio Libri Sex. Graec. Oxon. 1586. Aug. 1599. Lov. 1529, 1568. Basil. 1544. Lat. Paris. 1561.
  • De Virginitate Graec. Lat. Livin••io interp. Ant. 1565. & 1575. ex versione Poggiana. Romae, 1562.
  • De providentia apud Oporinum. Basil. 1552.
  • De orando Deum, interprete. Erasmo. Basil. Froben. 1500, 1551. Col. 1573. Ant. 1579. Paris, 1538.
  • Aliquot opuscula. Ex V. Erasmi, Bas. 1529.
  • Liber de vita Babylae contra Gentiles, Gr. Basil. 1527. Paris, 1528. Lat. per Brinium, Paris, 1528.
  • Sermones ad Theodorum Lat. 1524. Basiliae, 1547.
  • Comparatio Regis & Monachi, Basil. 1533. Gr. Lat. Paris, 1598. Basil. 1526.
  • Quod nemo laeditur nisi à seipso. Graece in Octavo, Paris, 1541.
  • Liturgia sive Missa, Lat. Erasmo interprete, Paris. 1537. Graec. Paris, 1560. Venet. 1601, 1620. ex versione Hervet. 1548. Paris.
  • Orat quod Christus sit Deus, Ingolstad. 1579. apud Chevallon, Lat. 1536. Romae, 1526.
  • In Euch. Graec. 1571. Morell. 1561. Lat. Worm∣matiae, 1541. Pragae, 1544. Ant. 1560. Gr. & Lat. Venetiis, 1528. in Bibl. PP.
  • Epistolae ad Innocent. Basil. 1529.
  • Ad Caesarium Moinii Varia Sacra, Roterad. An. 1687. [Londini 4to. 1688.]

  HOMILIAE VARIAE.

  • Hom. ad Pop. Ant. de Statuis, Londini Graec. Lat. 1590.
  • Orat. in illud, Modico vino utere. Hanov. 1550. in Octavo, Col. 1582.
  • In illud; Oportet Haereses esse. Oecol. interp. Mog. 1522.
  • Hom. 6. contra Jud. Hoëschelio interpret. Aug. 1602.
  • Orat. Sex de fato & providentia, Gr. Oct. Basil, 1526. Paris, 1554. Hagenoae, 1533.
  • Orat. 6. Gr. Oxon. Gr. Lat. 1586. Orat. in Eu∣tropium, in Ps. 100. & in laudem crucis, Paris, 1554. Tilmanno interprete.
  • De non contemnenda Ecclesia Dei, Morell. 1560.
  • In terrae Motum, &c. aliae Orat. interprete Ducaeo, Burdigalae, 1604.
  • Hom. de Anathemate, Gr. Lat. Paris, in Oct. 1547.
  • Libri tres de providentia Dei, ad Stagirium Lat. Alosti, 1487. ibid Orat. de dignitate humanae Originis.
  • Chrysostomi Orat. 10. a Beurero, Romae, 1581. Gr. Lat. Friburg. 1585. in Oct.
  • Varii tractatus, ibid. De animi humilitate, Je∣junio & Temperantia, Mog. 1604.
  • De Mansuetudine, Paris, 1570. De benignitate, Paris, 1594.
  • De politia Morali, Paris, 1545. Orat. 6. Paris, 1554.
  • Orat. aliquot. Lat. Gr. Lat. Romero in Oct. Bas. Oporin. 1551.
  • Hom. Gr. Hoëschelio interprete, 1587.
  • Hom. 2. Tiguri, 1558. Aliae, Lipsiae, Ann. 1538.
  • Aliae, Paris, 1606. Orat. Gr. Romae, 1594.
  • Florilegia, Mog. 1603. Lat. Hagenoae, 1528.

  SERMONES PANEGYRICI.

  • Hom. 4. in Job, Perionio interprete, Paris, 1565, Col. 1568.
  • Homiliae de laudibus Pauli, Aniano interp. Paris, 1499. cum op. Bedae seorsim, 1509.
  • De Petro & ••aulo Orat. 2. Gr. Lat. 1582.
  • Idem cum Orat. in duodecim Apostolos, Rom••, 1580.
  • Sermones Panegyrici in S. S. Martyres, Burd. 1601.
  • Duae homil. de S. S. Lugd. 1624. Gr. Lat. Pa∣ris, 1594.

  IN FESTA.

  • In Nat. Christi, & in pr••cursorem, Ant. apud Tornes, 1609.
  • Sermo in Pascha, Ant. 1598. Sermones in Ascen∣sionem, & alii... ex Ed. Vossii, Mog. 1604.
  • Orat. de occursu Domini, Col. 1568.]
• * 1.65

  Antiochus and Seve∣rianus of Gabala.
• a 1.66

  Asterius.] There were several of that Name. The oldest is an Heretick of Arius his Party, men∣tion'd in the first Volume. There is another Aste∣rius commended by Theodoret, in Philotheo, c. 2. but different from this, as well as the Catholick Bi∣shop of the same Name, who lived in the time of S. Athanasius.
• b 1.67

  Towards the latter end of the Fourth Century.] We have observed, That in the Sermon upon New-Years-day, he speaks of Ruffinus his Death, and of Eutropius his Disgrace, which he tells us happen'd the Year before, which justifyeth that he lived at the same time with S. Chrysostom.
• * 1.68

  Asterius Amasenus.
• c 1.69

  The Sermons of this Bishop have been quoted with Commendation by the Ancients.] He is cited in the Second Council of Nice, Act. 4. and 6. Photius made some Extracts out of his works, Cod. 271. Hadrian in lib. de un. quotes his Homilies, and Ni∣cephorus defends them against the Iconoclasts.
• * 1.70

  Anastasius.
• * 1.71

  Chromat. Bishop of Aquileia.
• * 1.72

  Gaudenti∣us, Bishop of Brescia.
• * 1.73

  John of Je∣rusalem.
• * 1.74

  [Petrus Wastellus.]
• * 1.75

  Theophilus of Alexan∣dria.
• * 1.76

  Theodorus of Mopsue∣sta.
• a 1.77

  In the Year 388.] What he saith in his Pre∣face, and at the beginning of the Historia Laufiaca, determines, th•• Chronology of this Author's Life. He says at the beginning of the History, that he went into Egypt under the Second Consulship of Theodosius, which was in the Year 388. And in the Preface, he saith, That he had been a Monk 33 Years, and 20 Years a Bishop, and that he was 53 Years old. He was therefore 20 Years old when he left his Country to become Monk. He was Or∣dained Bishop in 401, and wrote his History in 421.
• * 1.78

  Palladius.
• b 1.79

  Bishop of Aspuna] Socrates Hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 36. reckons him amongst the translated Bishops, and saith, that he went from Helenopolis to Aspuna.
• * 1.80

  P. Innocent.
• * 1.81

  P. Innoc. I.
• a 1.82

  The Town of Strigonium.] This Town is called Strigonium by Ptolomy; some confound it with Strigonium in Istria, others will have it to be diffe∣rent.
• * 1.83

  S. Jerom.
• b 1.84

  About the 345 of Jesus Christ.] The Chrono∣logy of S. Jerom's Life is much disputed; Some say, that he was born under the Empire of Con∣stantine; according to some, in the 25th. Year of that Emperor's Reign; and according to others in the 31st. that is, in the 331, or in 337. Prosper observes in his Chronicon, that he died when Theo∣dosius was the Ninth time Consul, and Constantius the Third, which is in the Year 420; and that he lived 91 Years. If this be so, the Year of his Nati∣vity should be 329 Paulus Diaconus, Sigebert, Bede, and the Writers of the Martyrologies, give him 98 Years; which would set the time of his Birth yet seven Years higher, if we depend upon Prosper's Epocha for the time of his Death. Baronius, on the contrary, computes that he lived but 78 Years; so that if S. Jerom dy'd in 420, he was born, accord∣ing to that Author, in 342. Lastly, Others affirm, That he was born in 348, or 350; and that he dy'd in 427. All that can be done in this diversi∣ty of Opinions, is to find out those which agree best with what S. Jerom hath written of himself, and with the Circumstances of his Life. He saith in his Commentary upon the Prophet Habakkuk, Chap. 3. That he was a Child, a Student in Gram∣mar, when Julian the Emperor was killed. Being, saith he, yet a Boy, PUER, and in Grammatical Exercises, at the time that all the Cities of the World were polluted with the Blood of Victims; in the greatest heat of Persecution, on a sudden came the news of Julian's Death. This expression, Dum adhuc essem puer, might intimate that S. Jerom was then but 10 or 12 Years old, if S. Jerom did not of∣ten use the same word to signifie an older Age; for in the Apology to Pammachius, he hath the same word when he speaks of his Age when he was at Rome. Dum essem puer Roma, & liberalibus stu∣diis erudirer, &c. Now it is certain that he was then above 12 Years of Age. In a Letter to Ne∣potian, speaking of the Time of his retiring, he saith that he was then adolescens, imo penè puer. And yet he was then 30 Years old at the least. In the 15th. Chapter of his Commentary upon Isaiah, making mention of the Earthquake that happened under the Consulship of Valens and Valentinian, anno 365, he saith that he was a Boy, and yet he must be then above 24 Years old. Lastly, In his Preface to the Commentary upon Obadiah, he saith, That he had formerly made a Commentary upon that Prophet, being yet a Child: Quid igitur con∣demnamus, in quibus pueri lusimus? Baronius af∣firms, that S. Jerom saith in the same place, that he was 30 Years old when he writ his first Com∣mentary upon Obadiah, and that 30 other Years were gone since: If it is certainly so, there could be no difficulty to fix the Epocha of S. Jerom's Na∣tivity; but he doth not say positively that he was 30 Years old, when he made that first Commentary. It is certain that S. Jerom was ordained Priest by Paulinus, before the Peace was concluded with Meletius, and consequently before the Year 378; but he could not be then less than 30 Years of Age. When he came to Rome, three Years before the Death of Pope Damasus, in 382, he must have been 40 Years old at least. In 392 he composed his Treatise of Ecclesiastical Writers, and he must needs have been then above 50. He began to grow in Years, when he had some differences with S. Au∣gustin; and he treateth that Saint, who was born in 355, as a person much younger than himself. All these things give us Reason to believe, that S. Je∣rom was born in the Year 340, or 342; That he compleated his Studies at Rome in the 25th. Year of his Age, or thereabouts, towards the Year 365; That he went into the Solitudes of Syria at 30, in 370, or 371; That he was ordained Priest at 35, in 375; That he came to Rome in 382, and went from thence in 385; That he retired to Bethle∣hem in 386, or 387; That he composed his Trea∣tise of Ecclesiastical Writers in 392, where he men∣tioneth the Books that he had wrote before; That he writ Letters and Treatises after the Taking of Rome, in the Year 412; That he died about 420, Aged 78, or 80 Years.
• c 1.85

  His Father Eusebius.] He was of a good Fa∣mily, and sufficiently rich. S. Jerom says, that he had a great Family. The Name of his Mother is not known. His Aunt by the Mother's side was called Castorina. S. Jerom wrote to her the 36 Let∣ter. He had a Sister that vowed Virginity, and a Brother much younger than himself, called Pauli∣nianus.
• d 1.86

  The first Principles of Languages, &c.] He gives this Account of his first Studies, in his Apology a∣gainst Rufinus. Memini me puerum cursitasse per cellulas Servulorum, dum feriatum duxisse lusibus, & ad Orbilium saevientem de aviae sinu tractum esse captivum.
• e 1.87

  The famous Donatus.] He that writ Commen∣taries upon Virgil and Terence, as S. Jerom assures us, in the first Book against Rufinus, where he cal∣leth Donatus his Tutor, as well as in his Chronicon.
• f 1.88

  A wonderful Progress in Philological Lear∣ning.] He learned the Latin and the Greek Tongues perfectly, and got an exact knowledge of profane Authors: He exercised himself in publick pleadings and frequented the Bar, as he confesseth in the Se∣cond Chapter of his Commentary upon the Epistle to the Galatians.
• g 1.89

  Having been baptized at Rome] He says so positively in two Letters to Damasus, which are the 57th, and 58th, where he observes, That he took the Robe of Christianity in the City of Rome.
• h 1.90

  With Bonosus his ancient Companion] S. Je∣rom saith in his Letter to Rufinus, that they had been bred together, had studied together, and that they went together, to Rome, and travelled toge∣ther into Gaul; but he followed not S. Jerom in his Journey into Syria, but retired into a Desart Island of Dalmatia.
• i 1.91

  He departed from Italy with Heliodorus.] He would not continue in his Native Countrey for se∣veral Reasons, but particularly, because of the dis∣orderly Behaviour of Lupicinus the Bishop; nor at Rome, by reason of the tu••••lt of that great City, that disturbed his rest.
• k 1.92

  He was ordained Priest by Paulinus, but up∣on condition that he should not quit that kind of Life, which he had embraced, nor be obliged to per∣form any of the Functions, &c.] He says in his Apology to Pammachius, that ••e told Paulinus, Si sic Pres∣byterum tribuis, ut Monachum nobis non auferas, tu videris de judicio tuo. S. Epiphanius writing to John of Antioch, says that S. Jerom and Vincentius, two Priests would perform no Functions of their Ministery, refusing so much as to offer the Sacrifice. Cum sancti Presbyteri Hieronymus & Vincentius propter verecundiam & humilitatem, nollent debita nomini suo exercere Sacrificia, & laborare in hac parte Ministerii, qua Christianorum praecipua salus est.
• l 1.93

  He was called to Rome with Paulinus and S. Epiphanius.] He says so himself in his 16th, and 27th Epistles. He came thither in 382, and went away three years after, as he observes in the Letter to Asella; he speaks in the 11th Letter, and in his Apology to Pammachius of the Letters, and Answers which he writ in Damasus's Name.
• m 1.94

  He was charged likewise with the conduct of the most considerable Ladies of the Town.] These Ladies are become famous by S. Jerom's writ∣tings; their Names are Marcella, who being left a young Widow, and having been but seven Months with an Husband, refused to Marry a Man of the first quality called Cerealis, to continue in Widow-hood. Her Mother Albina, who came also to hear S. Jerom. Melania is not less famous by the Praises of S. Jerom, than by those of Rufinus. Asel∣la, Marcellina, and Felicitas, are also of the num∣ber of those whom he commended: but his great∣est Affection appeared to be for Paula and her Daughters, Blesilla, Eustochium, Paulina, Ruffina, and Toxotium. This is what he saith himself in his Let∣ter to Asella, of the Esteem, which he had gotten among the Women. I have, saith he, dwelt three years at Rome, I was often encompassed with great numbers of Virgins and Women, I often expounded the Holy Scripture to them, This reading made them constant, and their Assiduity begot a kind of Fami∣liarity, upon which an ill Opinion was conceived of me, and yet he was not able to prevent wholly evil speaking. The Clergy of that City, whose man∣ners he reproved, found fault with his Carriage, accused him of too much Familiarity with Paula, and they suborned a Footman to tax him with dis∣order; but the Fellow being imprisoned, and put to the Rack, disowned all that he had said before.
• n 1.95

  By Sophronius.] Erasinus published this Ver∣sion under Sophronius's Name upon the credit of a Manuscript. None doubted at first, but that it was his. Mr. Vossius the Father owned it, but M. Isaac Vossius his Son, contradicted that Opinion in his Notes upon S. Ignatius's Epistles: where he boldly affirms, that this Version is not Sophronius's: that it is very bad, that he that made it did not under∣stand Greek; that it is visible that it was written by an Impostor, Huetius in his Book, De optimo gene∣re interpretandi, refutes Vossius, and doth not doubt but that Translation was made by Sophronius.
• * 1.96

  [See S. E∣piphan. Vol. II.]
• * 1.97

  [By this it will ap∣pear that things are not al∣ways to be appro∣ved or disapproved upon S. Jerom's Word. In his management of his Quarrel he is deserted by the Papists, because they condemn the Errors of Origen as well as he, and therefore they cannot with any Decency excuse his Carriage towards Rufinus; but in his Controversies with Jovinian and Vigilantius, concerning Virginity, and Invocation of Saints, he is applauded by them; only the wiser men amongst them are a little out of Coun∣tenance at his Heat: It is a Misfortune that Jovinian's and Vigilantius's Books are lost; and there is Rea∣son to believe from those other Disputes wherein S. Jerom was ingaged, that if we knew what they said for themselves, instead of thinking them Hereticks, we should esteem them illustrious Defenders of the Christian Religion against that Superstition which an immoderate Zeal for a Monastical Life, did at that time introduce into the Church. Jovinian indeed is accused of maintaining, That a Christian who is baptized cannot fall a∣way from Grace, which is a very great Error; but it had no relation to his other Opinions, and since Obstinacy is necessary to make a man a Heretick, it would be rashness to call Jovinian a Heretick of whom we know nothing, but what we have from his Enemies.]
• * 1.98

  [Eras∣mus's Edi∣tion which Dr. Cave follows calls him Bonasus, which seems to be the truer Reading by the Letter it self, wherein S Jerom, quib∣bles upon his Name, and plays upon his Nose, and tells him, That tho' his Name be lucky, yet upon that Account he has no Reason to value himself]
• o 1.99

  He made a New Translation.] He speaks of this Version as wholly his own in the Eighty ninth Letter, to S. Augustin; yet it is likely, that he made use in several Books of the Scripture, of the ancient vulgar Translation, which he only corrected: It is certain that he made a new Translation of the Psalms, as he says himself in this Epistle to Sunia and Fretela; He also translated anew the Book of Job, as appears by the two Prefaces to that Book, and to those of Salomon, as it is observed in the Second Book of the Apology against Rufinus.
• p 1.100

  The Books which the Jews own to be Cano∣nical.] He did not translate the Books that were not in the Canon of the Hebrews, except To∣bit, and Judith; and so the Translations of the Books of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Maccabees, Baruk, and Jere∣miah's Letter, and the Additions to the Books of Hester and Daniel, are not S. Jerom's.
• q 1.101

  Excepting the Translation of the Psalms, and some mixtures of the ancient vulgar Translation.] It is certain that our vulgar is not the ancient Tran∣slation that was made from the Septuagint. It is certain also that it was made from the Hebrew, but none of the Fathers understood Hebrew besides S. Jerom, and so the Body of that Translation can∣not be attributed to any Body else: Besides, the Tran slations of the Books of the Bible which are in his Commentaries, are almost wholly consormable to our vulgar. We find also in the other Books a great many of those Alterations which S. Jerom professes to have made in his Translation. It is certain that the vulgar Translation of the Psalms is not S. Jeroms's. It was not made after the Hebrew, but after the Septuagint, tho' it is in some places conformable to the Translations of Theodotion, Aquila, and Symmachus, and different from that of S. Jerom, which is yet extant among his Works. The Addi∣tions to the Books of Hester, and Daniel, are not of S. Jerom's Translation, no more than that of the Books that were not in the Jewish Canon. In shor••, in our vulgar Latin are many places, which are re∣mains of the ancient Translation mingled with the new, for there are several places agreeable to the Translation of the LXX, and differing from the Hebrew Text, as well as from the Observations, and Translation of S. Jerom, who scrupulously ty∣ed himself to the Hebrew Truth.
• * 1.102

  [If some Persons will think S. Jerom to blame, others, up∣on much better grounds, will com∣mend him for disapproving Practices that are so very superstitious, and that cannot any manner of way tend to the advance∣ment of solid Piety and Holiness.]
• * 1.103

  [These words, which is the Church are not in S. Jerom.]
• * 1.104

  [After what has been alrea∣dy said of S. Jerom, one can hardly esteem him a Person, upon whose Authority Points of Doctrine or Matters of Dis∣cipline can safely be established. He may however give the Sence of the Church in his own time, in Matters where∣in he personally was not concerned, in which we have Reason to think that he gives a faithfull Account of things: And therefore since we have no Cause to disbelieve what he says of the Eucharist, and of (what the Church of Rome calls the Sacrament of) Penance; but, on the contrary, may reasonably suppose, that he spake the Sence of the Church. The Passages themselves are to be examined. Of those concerning the Eucharist, we are to consider, 1. That he keeps himself to the Language of the New Testament in his Answer to Hedibia's Question, and only confutes the Millennaries, but says nothing of the Modus of the Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament. 2. That his Interpretation of those Words in S. John, My Flesh is Meat indeed, and my Blood is Drink indeed, of the Spiritual and Divine Flesh of Jesus Christ, shews that he understood them Allegorically; for he distinguishes that from the Flesh of Jesus Christ, which suffered upon the Cross: Now there is equal Reason to believe, that what our Saviour says in the 6th. Chapter of S. John, concerning Eating his Flesh, and Drinking his Blood, is literally to be understood, as what he says in the Institution of the Sacrament of the Eucharist: And if one is Allegorically to be interpreted, then they are both. 3. That the Myste••••••s of Religion were as nicely exa∣mined in that Age, as in any since Jesus Christ declared it to the World; and when every thing else that was My∣sterious was controverted, this single Article of the Real Presence, as defined by the Council of Trent, which is contrary to that Reason, that the other Disputes concerning the Trinity and the Divine Decrees are properly above, was never debated. This is so strange (if we suppose the Doctrine of the Church of Rome to have been then receiv'd) that it is incredible; especially when we consider, 4. That the generality of the Fathers, at that time, interpreted every thing in Scripture Allegorically, to which they could not assign a convenient Literal sence. This the People were used to: This was S. Jerom's practice very often; and he had learnt it of Origen, whom he seems sincerely to have follow'd, till he quarrelled with Rufinus: So that we have great Reason to think, that Men so accustomed to Allegories, as the Teachers and the People were in this Age, would not be at a Loss to interpret our Blessed Saviour's meaning in any of his Words, which Literally interpreted, would contradict and do Violence to that Reason by which they were capacitated to understand any part of his Law.

  The Passage produced in favour of Auricular Confession proves nothing less; S. Jerom says, That after the Priest had heard the difference of Sins, he knew whom to bind and whom to loose; that is very true; but that is no Reason for Men to reveal all their Sins to the Priest; because the Church, in that Age, put Men under Penance only for pub∣lick Sins; those that had committed private ones of such a Nature, as would, if discovered, have made them unfit to come to the Sacrament, were exhorted to put themselves under a voluntary Penance; and if they did so; they were obliged to declare why they did it, that so the time of their Penance might be regulated; but this seems to have been left to themselves, which makes it quite another thing from the practice of the Church of Rome.]
• * 1.105

  [Dr. Cave mentions an Edition of S. Je∣rom's Works at Frankfort in 1684, in 12 Vo∣lumes in folio, with all the Scholia, Censures, Index's, and Collections of all sorts that had been printed, till that time, upon S. Jerom; which are all comprized in the three last Volumes.]
• a 1.106

  Sir-named Toranus or Tyranius.] This Sir∣name was given him by a certain Author that speak∣eth of Ecclesiastical Writers, whose Book is imme∣diately after the Treatise of Ildephonsus of Toledo in Miraeus's Bibliotheca. He is commonly called Toranus; but the Original of that Name is not known.
• b 1.107

  Priest of Aquileia.] Gennadius, Palladius, and all the rest of the Ancients say that he was of Aquileia, a City of Italy; yea, himself seems to declare it plainly in his Apology; yet Marius Mer∣cator calleth him a Syrian. Garnerius is of opini∣on, That that Rufinus, spoken of by Marius Mer∣cator, and whom he supposes to have been Author of the Pelagian Heresie in Rome, is not the same with him of whom we write now; but his Argu∣ments are very weak, and in all probability he is the same Rufinus. Father Gerberon thinks, on the contrary, that Marius Mercator speaks indeed of our Rufinus; but he affirms, that Rufinus was not born in Aquileia, but only a Priest and an Inhabi∣tant of that Town. He quotes two passages of S. Je∣rom to prove it, but they are not convincing. It is more natural to say that Marius Mercator called Rufinus, a Syrian, because he dwelt long in Syria, and came from thence, when he sowed the Pelagian Doctrine in Rome.
• c 1.108

  One of his best friends] S. Jerom commends him in the 5th. Epistle to Florentius, and recom∣mends him as a Man whom he particularly e∣steem'd. His 4th. Epistle to Rufinus shews the same.
• * 1.109

  Rufinus.
• d 1.110

  He embraced a Monastick life.] He saith in his first Invective, that Thirty years before he was baptized in a Monastery by Chromatius, Jovinian and Eusebius. This Writing is of 399, or 400.
• e 1.111

  To go into Egypt, &c.] Palladius relateth these Circumstances of the Lives of Rufinus and Melania, in his Historia Laufiaca. Chap. 32, and 33. he saith, That they abode 27 Years in the East, but S. Paulinus reckons but 25: And this Epocha agreeth best with the other circumstances of their Journey.
• f 1.112

  Yet they were reconciled.] S. Epiphanius in his Letter charges Rufinus with Origen's Errors, and reckons him among the Followers of John of Jerusalem, and among S. Jerom's Enemies. S. Je∣rom says the same in the 66th. Letter to Rufinus, as soon as he had published his Translation of the Books of Principles, Scias nos reconciliatas inimi∣citias purè colere.
• g 1.113

  Where he died, &c.] S. Jerom in his Com∣mentaries upon Ezekiel and Jeremiah, speaks of Rufinus as one already dead: It is certain that Rufinus retired into Sicily after Rome was taken, as he says himself in his Letter to Ursacius, set forth by Valesius.
• h 1.114

  Eusebius his Ecclesiastical History reduced in∣to Nine Books, and Translated with great Liberty.] He hath passed over almost all Eusebius his Ninth Book, and hath made but One of the Eighth and Ninth. In the Seventh he hath added a Relation of S. Gregory Thaumaturgus his Miracles, which is not in Eusebius; and in the Ninth, an Harangue of Lucian the Martyr. There is some alteration in the Order of the Chapters in the Sixth and Se∣venth Books. There are several faults in his Transla∣tion; he makes Zacharias, spoken of in S. Luke, to have been a Martyr at Lions; he confounds S. Biblias with S. Blandina, &c.
• i 1.115

  The Books of Recognitions.] Bellarmin be∣lieves that this Translation is falsely attributed to Rufinus; but Gennadius owns it to be his.
• k 1.116

  The Sentences of Sixtus the Pythagorean.] S. Jerom upbraids him with that fraud in several places. Ep. ad Ctesiph. in c. 18. Ezek. & in c. 22. Jeremiae.
• * 1.117

  [By Ma∣thematici∣ans, they meant Ju∣dicial Astrologers; as also did most of the ancient Romans, who were for the most part very ignorant of that part of Learning, till towards the Fall of their Empire, when Apuleius, Boëthius and Cassiodorus Translated some of the Elementary Books of the Grecians, into Latin.]
• l 1.118

  There are many Historical faults.] These are some of them. He supposes that Athanasius hid himself for six years after he was condemned by the Council of Tyre. He perverts the Order of Time in the History of S. Athanasius. He sheweth but little favour to S. Gregory Nazianzen, and S. Basil. He saith that S. Hilary was Excommunicated, which is false: And he confounds the Time, when he says, That S. Hilary was Banished after the Council of Milan. There are several other faults of the same nature; notwithstanding which, it is a very usefull Work, because he is the first that has unfolded and put in order the History of that time.
• m 1.119

  There are whole Periods taken out of S. Au∣gustin's Commentaries upon the Psalms.] This is particularly remarkable upon the 1st. Psal. ver. 1. Psal. 3d. ver. 1. Psal. ••th. ver. 1. Upon the Ninth Psalm there is a whole Period which beginneth, Prima persecutio, taken almost word for word out of S. Augustin's Commentary upon the Third Psalm. The Author says, That he lived in a time, when no Heresies appeared, which shews that this is the Work of a new Compiler.
• * 1.120

  Sophronius.
• a 1.121

  Severus Sulpicius.] Gennadius saith, That Sulpicius was his Sirname; and S. Gregory of Tours, lib. de vit. S. Mart. c. 1. & l. ••0. Hist. Franc. c. 31. calleth him as we do Severus Sulpicius: but in his Letters he calls himself Sulpicius Severus. But sometimes the Sirname is put before the Proper name. Most of the Ancients call him only Sulpicius. [Sulpicius was the Name of his Family; the Emperor Galba was of the Sulpician Family: Severus was his cognomen, as Cicero to Tully, and Crispus to Sallust; so that in Strictness his Name is Sulpicius Severus, not Severus Sulpicius; his Praenomen, which went always first, is not known: In Gennadius's time, the Roman way of naming Persons was almost wholly out of use, excepting some few of the Descendants of the Old Roman Families; and therefore one is not strictly to take those words Cognomento Sulpi∣cius, as if Severus were the Name of the Family and not Sulpicius.
• b 1.122

  Priest of Agen.] He saith in the first Dia∣logue c. 20. that he was of Aquitain, and in hi•• History l. 2. He calleth Phaebadius Bishop of Age•• his Bishop. They were mistaken who confoun•••• him with one Sulpicius Bishop of Bourges, who lived above 190 years afterwards under King Gontran: all the Ancients allow to this Sulpicius no other Qua∣lity, besides that of Priest.]
• * 1.123

  Severus Sulpicius.
• * 1.124

  Paulinus.
• a 1.125

  Pelagius, an English Monk.] S. Augustin, Ep. 106. Marius Mercator, S. Prosper in his Chroni∣con, and in the Poem of ungrateful Men, call him Britonem, or Britannum. S. Augustin in several places gives him the Quality of Monk. He was of the Monastery of Bangor in England, not in Ireland. He began to publish his Error in Rome towards the latter end of the fourth Century, if Marius Mercator may be believed.
• * 1.126

  Pelagius.
• b 1.127

  A Commentary upon S. Paul's Epistles.] S. Augustin and Marius Mercator speak of his Com∣mentaries, and the latter observes that he compo∣sed them before the taking of Rome, which hap∣pened in the year 410.
• c 1.128

  Attributed to S. Jerom.] Some question whether this Commentary be the same which S. Augustin quoteth under Pelagius his Name. 1. Be∣cause that among S. Ambrose's Works there is also a Pelagian Commentary upon S. Paul's Epistles. 2. Because all the passages cited by S. Augustin out of Pelagius's Commentaries are not to be found there, or at least they are not there in the same Terms. The former of these two Reasons is very weak, it being possible that a Pelagian Author might write Commentaries upon S. Paul, different from Pelagius's. The second would be of some weight, if in that Commentary attri∣buted to S. Jerom, there were not most of the passages quoted by S. Augustin. For in the first place, S. Augustin in the 16th chapter of Pelagius his Acts, saith, that that Heretick had expounded these Words of the 9th chapter of the Romans, Neque volentis, neque currentis est Dei; by saying that S. Paul spake thus by way of Interrogation, Voce interrogantis & redarguentis. This very Exposition, and these very Words are in the Com∣mentary we are now speaking of. z. S. Augu∣stin, in the 3d Book of the Merits of Sins, ch. 12. saith, that Pelagius expounding that place of the 7th Chapter of the Epistle to the Corinthians, Sancti∣ficatus est vir fidelis, observes that there were several Examples of believing Women who had converted their unbelieving Husbands. The same Remark is in this Commentary. 3. S. Augustin, in the same Book, chap. 4. saith, that Pelagius tells us upon these Words, Rom. 5. Quae est form••∣futuri, that they may be understood several ways: the same thing is mentioned in this Commentary: But what puts the matter out of doubt, is that Marius Mercator in his Commentaries, cites a long Passage out of Pelagius's Commentaries, which is found intire in this. It is true that S. Augustin in the 3d Book of the Merits of Sins, chap. 2. produces an Argument against Original Sin which is not in this Commentary, and that he quotes in the 3d chap. a place taken notice of by Ma∣rius Mercator, which likewise is not in this Com∣mentary ascribed to S. Jerom; but those places may possibly have been blotted out by some Ca∣tholicks.
• d 1.129

  The Letter to Demetrias.] It is certainly Pelagius's. See what is said of it in the Account of S. Jerom.
• e 1.130

  The Confession of Faith directed to Pope In∣nocent.] This Confession of Faith was delivered to Zosimus Successor to Innocent, who sent it to the African Bishops.
• a 1.131

  Coelestius, Pelagius his Country-man and Disciple.] S. Jerom says that he was of Scotland or Ireland; that he was a Disciple of Pelagius, and afterwards Head of the Pelagians. Marius Mercator says that he was of a good Family, and born an Eunuch, and wanted no Lear∣ning.
• * 1.132

  Coelestius.
• b 1.133

  He was of a subtil and cunning Tem∣per.] S. Jerom in his Letter to Ctesiphon ob∣serves that his Disciples said that he went over the Thorns of Logick. He professeth to despise him much, and calleth him ignorant Calumnia∣tor, in his Preface upon Jeremy. But S. Augu∣stin, in his Book to Boniface, Chap. 3. takes notice that he had a great deal of Wit.
• * 1.134

  Niceas.
• * 1.135

  Olympius.
• * 1.136

  Bachiari∣us.
• * 1.137

  Sabbatius.
• * 1.138

  Isaac.
• * 1.139

  Paulus O∣rosius.
• * 1.140

  Lucianus, Avitus, Evodias, S••veras.
• * 1.141

  Marcellus Memoria∣lis.
• * 1.142

  Eusebius.
• * 1.143

  Ursinus.
• * 1.144

  Macarius.
• * 1.145

  Heliodorus.
• * 1.146

  Paulus.
• * 1.147

  Helvidius and Vigi∣lantius.
• * 1.148

  St. Au∣gustin.
• * 1.149

  Tome I.
• * 1.150

  St. Au∣gustin. Tome 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪
• * 1.151

  Tome II.
• * 1.152

  St. Au∣gustin. Tome II.
• * 1.153

  St. Au∣gustin. Tome III.
• * 1.154

  By these Words our Author means, That St. Augustin's Canon of S. S. was the same with that now received in the Church of Rome: But that does not appear from St. Au∣gustin's Words; for of those Books which the Church of England condemns as Apocryphal, he names none but Tobith, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, and the Maccabees. By the Book of Esdras, he does not mean those which we call by that name, but the Books of Ezrah, and Nehemiah, which he mentions no where else, and which were ne∣ver disputed in the Church; and it is uncer∣tain, whether he owned those Additions to the Book of Esther, that are now received in the, Church of Rome.
• * 1.155

  Tome IV.
• * 1.156

  Tome V.
• * 1.157

  St. Au∣gustin. Tome V.
• * 1.158

  Tome VI.
• * 1.159

  St. Au∣gustin. Tome VI.
• * 1.160

  [Who this Philo is, I don't know; it seems to be a Fault of the Press: Philo Carpathius, mention'd in the last Volume, dy'd several Years be∣fore St. Augustin wrote this Letter to Juliana.]
• * 1.161

  [This seems to be a mi∣stake of the Press: this Pauli∣nus, or as it is in the French Paulus, was Con∣tempora∣ry with Charles the Great, as∣sisted at the Coun∣cil of Francfort, and dy'd, according to Dr. Cave, in the Year 804.]
• * 1.162

  [What this Book upon the 41st. Ser∣mon shou'd be, I can∣not tell; it is false Printed in all proba∣bility, but not having this Bene∣dictine E∣dition of St. Augu∣stin by me, I could not alter it.]
• * 1.163

  Tom. VII.
• * 1.164

  St. Au∣gustin. I••me VII.
• * 1.165

  Tom. VIII
• * 1.166

  St. Au∣gustin. Tom. VIII
• * 1.167

  Tom. IX.
• * 1.168

  St. Au∣gustin. Tome IX.
• * 1.169

  Tom. X.
• * 1.170

  St. Au∣gustin. Tome X.
• * 1.171

  Z••simus.
• * 1.172

  Boniface I.
• * 1.173

  Synesius.
• * 1.174

  Polychro∣nius.